Ex  Libris 


UjAyii)  L cpwen 

The  Bernard  and  Jane  Schapiro  Professor  of 
Ancient  Near  Eastern  and  Judaic  Studies 

Cornell  University 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 
Getty  Research  Institute 


https://archive.org/details/sumerianadministOOmyhr 


THE  BABYLONIAN  EXPEDITION 

or 

THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  PENNSYLVANIA 


SERIES  A:  CUNEIFORM  TEXTS 


EDITED  BY 

H.  V.  HILPRECHT 


VOLUME  III,  Part  1 

BY 

DAVID  W.  M YH  R M AN 


“ECKLEY  BR1NT0N  COXE,  JUNIOR,  FUND” 


PHILADELPHIA 


Published  by  the  Department  of  Archaeology,  University  of  Pennsylvania 

1910 


THE  EDITOR  determ  mes  the  material  to  constitute  a volume  and 
reports  to  the  Committee  of  Publication  on  the  general  merits  of 
the  manuscript  and  autograph  plates  submitted  for  publication  ; but  the 
Editor  is  not  responsible  for  the  views  expressed  by  the  writer. 


SUMERIAN  ADMINISTRATIVE 

DOCUMENTS 


DATED  IN  THE  REIGNS  OF  THE  KINGS  OF 

THE  SECOND  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


FROM  THE 

(^jrmplr  Qrd)tu?s  of  Qippur 

PRESERVED  IN  PHILADELPHIA 

BY 


DAVID  W.  MYHRMAN 


Docent  of  Semitic  Languages  at  the  University  of  Uppsala. 


Seventy  Plates  of  Autographed  Texts  and  Twelve  Plates 
of  Halftone  Illustrations 


PHILADELPHIA 

Published  by  the  Department  of  Archaeology,  University  of  Pennsylvania 

1910 


MacCalla  & Co.  Inc.,  Printers  * 

C.  H.  James,  Lithographer 

Weeks  Photo-Engraving  Co.,  Halftones 


Co 

JYIrs.  Charles  Custis  Garrison 

with 

Gsteem  and  Gratitude 


for 

F)er  Interest,  Generosity  and  Kindness 


PREFACE. 


The  texts  published  in  this  volume  were  copied  during  my  sojourn  in  Philadel- 
phia in  1907.  They  have  since  then  been  worked  out  at  sundry  hours,  between 
the  more  immediately  pressing  work  on  other  publications,  especially  my  edition 
of  the  Arabic  text  of  as-Subki’s  kitab  mu1  id  an-ni ‘am  wa-mubid  an-niqam,  as  well 
as  the  routine  work  of  teaching  and  lecturing  in  connection  with  my  duties  as 
Docent  of  Semitic  Languages  at  the  University  of  Uppsala.  This  together  with 
unfortunate  and  hindering  circumstances  has  caused  a delay  in  publication,  which 
I am  the  first  one  most  keenly  to  regret.  The  volume  was  accepted  by  the  Editor- 
in-Chief  and  the  Committee  on  Publication,  December  21,  1909,  and  went  into  the 
printers’  hand  early  in  January,  after  the  means  for  printing  it  had  again  been 
generously  provided. 

The  title  of  the  volume  may  call  for  an  explanation.  As  can  be  gathered  from 
the  general  survey  of  the  contents  of  these  texts,  the  documents  included  are  legal 
and  commercial  as  well  as  purely  administrative.  While  it  was  desirable  to  give  the 
volume  as  short  a title  as  possible  and  yet  to  denote  the  general  characteristics  of 
the  documents,  the  term  administrative  was  selected  on  the  suggestion  of  the 
Editor-in-Chief,  as  that  term  would  include  the  different  departments  of  the  temple 
administration,  to  which  these  documents  refer. 

In  regard  to  the  general  plan  as  well  as  minor  details  of  the  volume,  I naturally 
have  followed  the  principles  characteristic  of  the  Series,  of  which  it  forms  a part. 
In  the  matter  of  footnotes,  however,  I have  aimed  to  place  whatever  I may  have 
had  to  say  or  argue  in  the  text  proper,  reserving  the  footnotes  merely  for  references, 
except,  of  course,  in  the  Chapters  of  Translations  and  Names. 

As  this  is  the  first  volume  of  texts  from  the  time  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur, 
published  in  this  Series,  I have  judged  it  desirable,  if  not  altogether  necessary,  to 
include  a list  of  cuneiform  signs,  characteristic  of  this  volume  and  the  period  in 
question. 

At  present  there  is  a great  variety  of  systems,  or  rather  lack  of  systems, 
employed  in  regard  to  the  transcription  of  cuneiform  signs,  which  makes  it  almost 

[vii] 


PREFACE. 


viii 

impossible  to  ascertain  from  a mere  transcription,  which  particular  sign  on  the  cunei- 
form tablet  is  actually  referred  to.  Hence  I have  also  added  the  key  to  the  system 
of  transcription  I have  used,  but  for  the  time  being  only  including  signs  or  tran- 
scriptions of  signs  that  actually  occur  in  this  volume. 

The  most  pleasant  task  remains  to  avow  my  obligations  to  those,  who  in  one 
way  or  another  have  promoted  the  creation  of  this  volume.  To  Professor  Hilprecht, 
the  Editor-in-Chief  of  this  Series,  I am  under  great  obligations  for  the  confidence 
he  showed  me  by  entrusting  the  publication  of  these  tablets  into  my  hands,  as 
well  as  for  his  still  greater  confidence  in  entrusting  to  me  the  publication  of  other 
texts,  the  copying,  interpretation  and  translation  of  which  would  tax  the  working 
ability,  scientific  skill  and  experience  of  any  Assyriologist  to  the  very  utmost.  In 
every  way  he  has  also  facilitated  my  work,  and  he  has  been  kind  enough  to  assist 
me  in  reading  the  proofs.  In  this  way  the  volume  has  greatly  been  enriched  by 
his  knowledge  and  experience.  Likewise  1 am  under  great  obligations  to  Provost 
Harrison,  whose  wide-hearted  scientific  interest  and  generosity  in  a large  measure 
brought  about  my  coming  to  Philadelphia,  and  also  made  my  prolonged  sojourn 
here  in  1907  possible.  To  Mrs.  Harrison  I am  most  grateful  for  her  enthusiastic 
interest  in  this  work.  By  her  generosity  my  return  to  this  city  and  my  work  here 
this  time  was  and  is  made  possible.  As  a small  token  of  my  great  esteem  and  devo- 
tion I have  taken  the  liberty  to  dedicate  this  volume  to  her.  I also  beg  to  express 
mv  high  appreciation  and  my  gratitude  to  Mr.  Eckley  Brinton  Coxe,  Jr.,  the 
Maecenas  of  Philadelphia,  who,  generously  as  ever,  has  sustained  the  heavy  cost 
of  printing.  To  Dr.  Radau  I am  indebted  for  many  a valuable  suggestion.  I also 
wish  to  acknowledge  my  obligations  to  the  authorities  and  officers  of  the  University 
of  Pennsylvania,  of  the  University  Museum  and  the  University  Library,  who  as 
courteously  as  effectively  have  facilitated  my  work.  And  last,  and  first,  I beg  to 
thank  my  many  noble  friends  of  this  city,  who  by  their  kindness  and  hospitality 
have  made  their  own  Philadelphia  a home  city  to  me.  As  this  has  been  a con- 
slant  source  of  encouragement  and  support  during  weary  toil,  my  friends  have  a 
large  share  in  the  creation  of  this  volume.  One  and  all,  I beg  graciously  to  accept 
my  sincere  appreciation  and  heartfelt  gratitude. 

David  W.  Myhrman, 

Philadelphia, 

February,  1910. 


LIST  OF  ABBREVIATIONS. 


A.  B A ssyriologische  Bibliothek,  ed.  Delitzsch-Haupt,  Leipzig,  1881. 

A.  B.  M Kiichler,  Fr.,  Assyrisch-Babylonische  Medizin,  Leipzig,  1904. 

A.  B.  P Meissner,  Br.,  Beitrdge  zum  Altbabylonisches  Privatrecht. 

A.  D.  D Johns,  C.  H.  W.,  Assyrian  Deeds  and  Documents,  London,  1898-1901. 

A.  J.  S.  L American  Journal  of  Semitic  Languages  and  Literature,  ed.  Harper,  Chicago. 

Amherst Pinches,  T.  G.,  The  Amherst  Tablets,  etc.,  London,  1908. 

A.  R.  LJ .,  I Schorr,  Moses,  Altbabylonische  Rechtsurkunden,  etc.;  Sitzungsberichte  der  Philosophisch-Historischen 

Klasse  der  Kaiserlichen  Akademie  der  Wissenschaften,  Band  155,  2,  Wien,  1908. 

A.  R.  U.,  II The  second  Part  of  the  above,  Band  160,  5,  Wien,  1909. 

A.  S.  K.  T Haupt,  P.,  Akkadische  und  Sumerische  Keilschrifttexte,  etc.,  Leipzig,  1881. 

A.  T Knudtzon,  J.  A.,  Die  El-Amarna-Tafeln,  Vorderasiatische  Bibliothek,  Leipzig,  1907-1909. 

A.  V. Strassmaier,  J.  N.,  Alfabetisches  Verzeichniss  der  Assyrischen  und  Akkadischen  Wdrter,  Leipzig,  1886. 

B.  A Beitrdge  zur  Assyriologie,  etc.,  ed.  Delitzsch-Haupt,  Leipzig,  1900. 

B.  A.  L.  C Johns,  C.  H.  W.,  Babylonian  and  Assyrian  Laws,  Contracts  and  Letters,  London. 

B.  E The  Babylonian  Expedition  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania,  Philadelphia,  edited  by  H.  V. 

Hilprecht,  Series  A and  D,  1893-1910.  The  exact  titles  are  given  at  the  end  of  the  present  book. 

B.  R Kohler  und  Peiser,  A us  dem  Babylonischen  Rechtsleben. 

Br Brtinnow,  R.  E.,  A Classified  List,  etc.,  Leyden,  1889. 

Br.-M Meissner,  Br.,  Supplement  zu  den  Assyrischen  W orterbuchern,  Leiden,  1898. 

B.  T.  Nk Strassmaier,  J.  N.,  Babylonische  Texte,  Inschriften  von  Nabuchodonosor,  etc.,  Leipzig,  1889. 

B.  T.  Nn The  same,  Inschriften  von  Nabonidus,  Leipzig,  1889. 

B.  V Peiser,  F.  E.,  Babylonische  Vertrdge  der  Berliner  Museen,  Berlin,  1890. 

C.  B.  M Catalogue  of  the  Babylonian  and  General  Semitic  Section  of  the  Free  Museum  of  Science  and  Art, 

University  of  Pennsylvania,  Philadelphia,  prepared  by  Prof.  Hilprecht. 

C.  C Virolleaud,  Ch.,  Comptabilite  Chaldeenne,  Poitiers,  1903. 

Chronicles King,  L.  W.,  Chronicles  concerning  Early  Babylonian  King s,  London,  1907. 

C.  T Cuneiform  Texts  from  Babylonian  Tablets,  London,  1896. 

D.  P.  M Delegation  en  Perse,  Memoires,  Paris,  1900. 

D.  P.  S Fuye,  Alotte  de  la,  Documents  Presargoniques,  Paris,  1908-1909. 

Di-tilla Virolleaud,  Ch.,  Di-tilla,  Textes  Juridiques  Chaldeens,  etc.,  Poitiers,  1903. 

E.  A.  II The  E.  A.  Hoffman  Collection  of  Babylonian  Clay  Tablets  in  the  General  Theological  Seminary, 

New  York  City.  See  E.  B.  H. 

E.  B.  H Radau,  II.,  Early  Babylonian  History,  etc.,  New  York,  1900. 

Geschichte  d.  Alt? Meyer,  Eduard,  Geschichte  des  Altertums,  2d  edition,  Stuttgart  and  Berlin,  1909. 

Hilprecht  Anniv Hilprecht  Anniversary  Volume,  Studies  in  Assyriology  and  Archeology,  dedicated  to  Herman  V. 

Hilprecht  upon  the  twenty-fifth  anniversary  of  his  doctorate  and  his  fiftieth  birthday  (July 
28),  by  his  colleagues,  friends  and  admirers,  Leipzig,  London,  Paris,  Chicago,  1909. 

H.  L,  C.  T..,,., Barton,  G.  A.,  Haverford  Library  Collection  of  Cuneiform  Tablets,  etc.,  Part  I,  Philadelphia  anci 

Lfonjon,  1905,  Parted 1 , 1909. 

[ixl 


X 


LIST  OF  ABBREVIATIONS. 


//  \y Delitzsch,  Friedr.,  Assyrisches  Handworterbuch,  Leipzig,  1896. 

./.  .4. Journal  Asiatique,  Paris. 

./  A.  0.  S Journal  oj  the  American  Oriental  Society,  New  Haven. 

./  B.  L Journal  of  the  Society  of  Biblical  Literature,  New  York. 

./.  R.  A.  S Journal  of  the  Royal  Asiatic  Society,  London. 

K.  .4.  S Peiser,  F.  E.,  Keilschriftliche  Acten-Stucke,  etc.,  Berlin,  1889. 

K.  B Keil inschriftl iche  Bibliothek,  ed.  Schrader,  Berlin,  1889-1900. 

L i H King,  L.  W„  Letters  and  Inscriptions  of  Hammurabi,  3 volumes,  London,  1898-1900. 

L.  S Leipziger  Semitistische  Studien,  ed.  Fischer-Zimmern,  Leipzig,  1903ff. 

M Meissner,  Br.,  Seltene  Assyrische  Ideogramme,  Leipzig,  1906-1909. 

M . D.  O.  G Milteilungen  der  Deutschen  Orient-Gesellschaft,  Berlin. 

M.  /.  0 Musee  Imperial  Ottoman,  Constantinople. 

Morgan Johns,  C.  H.  W.,  Cuneiform  Inscriptions,  etc.,  Collections  contained  in  the  Library  of  J.  Pierpont 

Morgan,  New  York,  190S. 

Muss-Amolt  Muss-Amolt,  W.,  A Concise  Dictionary  of  the  Assyrian  Language,  Berlin,  London  and  New  York, 

1895-1900. 

N.  B.  N Tallqvist,  K.  L.,  Neubabylonisches  Namenbuch,  Helsingfors,  1905. 

Nippur Peters,  J.  P.,  Nippur,  or  Explorations  and  Adventures  on  the  Euphrates,  etc.,  New  York  and  London, 

1897. 

O.  B.  T.  R Lau,  II.  J.,  Old  Babylonian  Temple  Records,  New  York,  1906. 

O.  L.  Z Orientalistische  Literal  ur zeit  ung , ed.  Peiser,  Leipzig. 

P.  K.  U.  N Huber,  E.,  Die  Personennamen  in  den  Keilschrifturkunden  aus  der  Zeit  der  Konige  von  Ur  und 

Nisin,  Leipzig,  1907. 

It Rawlinson,  Sir  H.  C.,  The  Inscriptions  of  Western  Asia,  Vols.  I-V,  London,  1861-1884.  Second 

edition  of  Vol.  IV,  London,  1891. 

R.  /I Revue  d’Assyriologie,  Paris,  ed.  Tliureau-Dangin. 

It.  E.  C Thureau-Dangin,  F.,  Recherches  sur  VOrigine  de  VEcriture  Cuneiforme,  Paris,  1898,  1899. 

It.  II Reisner,  Sumerisch-Babylonische  Hytnnen,  etc.,  Konigliche  Museen  zu  Berlin,  in  il  Milteilungen 

aus  den  Orientalischen  Sammlungen,"  Berlin,  1896. 

R.  M . ,4 Thompson,  R.  C.,  The  Reports  of  the  Magicians  and  Astrologers,  etc.,  London,  1900. 

R.  S Revue  Semitique,  etc.,  ed.  Halevy,  Paris. 

R.  T Recueil  de  Travaux  de  la  Philologie  et  a V Archeologie,  etc.,  ed.  Maspero,  Paris. 

R.  T.  C Thureau-Dungin,  F.,  Recueil  de  Tablettes  Chaldeennes,  Paris,  1893. 

S.  A.  K.  I Thureau-Dangin,  F.,  Die  Sumerischen  und  Akkadischen  Konigsinschriften,  Leipzig,  1907. 

Sd-tilla Pelagaud,  F.,  Sd-tilla,  Textes  Juridiques,  etc.,  in  Babyloniaca,  III,  2,  Paris,  1909. 

S.  C.  N Tallqvist,  K.  L.,  Die  Sprache  der  Contracte  NabA-nd’ids,  Helsingfors,  1890. 

S.  C.  P.  II.  C..  Hilprecht,  H.  V.,  The  So-called  Peter s-H ilprecht  Controversy , Philadelphia,  1908. 

T.  S.  A Genouillac,  H.  de,  Tablettes  Sumeriennes  Archaiques,  etc.,  Paris,  1909. 

T.  T Reisner,  G.,  Tempelurkunden  aus  Telloh,  Konigliche  Museen  zu  Berlin,  “ Mitteilungen  aus  den 

Orientalischen  Sammlungen,"  Berlin,  1901. 

Urlcunden  Peiser,  F.  E.,  Urkunden  aus  der  Zeit  der  dritten  Babylonischen  Dynasty,  Berlin,  1905. 

W.  Z.  K.  M Wiener  Zeitschrift  fur  die  Kunde  des  Morgenlandes,  Wien. 

Z.  A ...Zeitschrift  fur  tssyriologie,  etc.,  ed.  Bezold,  Strassburg. 


C 0 N T E N T S . 


PAGES 

Preface  .............  vii,  viii 

List  of  Abbreviations  ..........  ix,  x 

Contents  .........  . . xi,  xii 

Introduction  ............  1-146 

I.  The  Place  in  History  of  the  Second  Dynasty  of  Ur  . . . 1-8 

II.  The  Tablets  8-12 

III.  Similar  Tablets  ...........  13-15 

IV.  The  Subject  Matter  .........  16-20 

In  General  .....  ......  16,  17 

Survey  of  Contents  ..........  18-20 

V.  Dates  . 21-27 

VT.  Reconstruction  of  the  Dates  of  the  Second  Dynasty  of  Ur  . 28-44 

1.  Dates  of  TJr-Engur  .........  33 

2.  Dates  of  Dungi  ..........  34-39 

3.  Dates  of  Bur-Sin  ..........  39-41 

4.  Dates  of  Gimil-Sin  .........  41-43 

5.  Dates  of  Ibi-Sin  .........  43 

6.  Uncertain  Dates  .........  43 

7.  Unclassified  Dates  .........  43,  44 

VII.  The  Names  and  Order  of  the  Months  .....  45-51 

VIII.  Transcription  and  Translation  of  Specimen  Tablets  . . . 52-73 

IX.  Gleanings  ...........  74-83 

1.  Cuneiform  Signs  and  Readings  .......  74-79 

2.  Terms  of  Court  Proceedings  .......  79-80 

3.  Terms  of  Loan  and  Purchase  Documents  .....  80,  81 

4.  Terms  of  Accounts  . . . . . . . . .81,82 

5.  Officials  and  Employes  .........  82 

6.  Months 82, 83 

7.  Days 83 

8.  Date  Formulas  . . .......  83 

[ xi  ] 


XU 


CONTENTS. 


X.  Names  and  Titles  ....... 

1.  Names  of  Men  and  Women  . . . 

2.  Names  of  Gods  ....... 

3.  Names  of  Countries  and  Cities  ..... 

4.  Names  of  Temples  and  Houses  .... 

5.  Names  of  Months  ....... 

6.  Officials  and  Employees  ...... 

XI.  Description  of  Tablets 

XII.  Numbers  of  the  Catalogue  of  the  Babylonian  Museum 
Tablets  Arranged  According  to  Kings 

XIII.  I jIst  of  Cuneiform  Signs  ....... 

XIV.  System  of  Transcription  ...... 

Cuneiform  Texts  .......... 

Halftone  Illustrations  ........ 


PAGES 

84 

84-89 

89-91 

91 

92 
92 
92 

. 93-111 

112,  113 
113 
115-139 
. 141-146 
Pis.  1-70 
Pis.  I-XII 


I. 


THE  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  OF  THE  SECOND  DYNASTY 

OF  UIL 


The  chronological  material,  so  far  advanced,  does  not  enable  us  to  determine 
the  exact  date  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur  with  absolute  certainty.  A review  of 
the  principal  arguments  on  the  subject  and  an  attempt  approximately  to  place  this 
dynasty  may,  however,  not  be  out  of  place  in  an  introduction  to  a volume  of  texts 
from  this  period. 

On  account  of  the  publication  of  new  and  startling  chronological  material,  a 
great  deal  has  been  written  on  the  subject  of  old  Babylonian  chronology  during  the 
last  two  or  three  years.  The  discussion  so  far  has  shown  a marked  tendency  to  cut 
down  old  figures.  The  late  Babylonian  king  Nabiina’id  still  holds  his  ground  as 
the  central  figure  in  Babylonian  chronology,  only  that  the  pendulum  has  swung  in 
the  opposite  direction.  On  the  tide  of  his  authority  old  Babylonian  dates  once 
soared  to  swindling  heights;  the  recent  undermining  of  his  trustworthiness  tends  to 
make  the  very  foundations  swerve.  The  high-water  mark  was  reached  by  placing 
Sargon  I at  3800  B.C.  Eduard  Meyer  has  reached  the  low-water  mark  by  placing  him 
2500  B.C.1  The  one  extreme  was  to  take  the  round  numbers  of  Nabuna’id’s  scribes 
in  regard  to  earlier  and  later  dates  as  definite  numbers;  the  other  extreme  is  now  to 
round  them  off,  so  to  speak,  altogether.  The  truth,  no  doubt,  will  be  found  some- 
where between. 

Leaving  the  dates  of  Sargon  I and  Naram-Sin,  which  stand  rather  isolated, 
there  has  been  no  lack  of  material  in  regard  to  Babylonian  chronology  from  the 
beginning  of  the  so-called  first  dynasty  of  Babylon  down.  But  the  difficulties,  as 
well  known,  have  been  and  are  still  in  regard  to  the  interpretation  of  the  material 
at  hand.  At  what  widely  different  conclusions  scholars  have  arrived  from  the 
study  of  the  same  material,  can  be  gathered  from  the  different  dates  assigned  to  the 
prominent  figure  of  Hammurabi,  as  surveyed  by  King  in  his  latest  important  book.2 

1 Geschichle  des  Alt.2,  I,  Part  2,  p.  345. 

2 Chronicles,  I,  pp.  83,  87. 

1 [1] 


9 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


Thus  \ve  note  a difference  as  to  the  dates  of  that  king  between  Winckler  and 
Hommel  of  not  less  than  600  years,  and  between  Hommel  and  Lehmann-Haupt  of 
500  years.  Yet  the  calculations  were  made  in  the  same  year,  1898.  To  be  sure, 
discrepancies  are  to  be  found  in  the  statements  of  the  Babylonian  and  Assyrian 
documents  themselves,  which  tend  to  show,  that  the  old  Babylonian  and  Assyrian 
scribes,  in  their  mode  of  interpretation  and  handling  of  the  chronological  material 
at  their  disposal,  as  well  as  in  reaching  different  conclusions  from  it,  almost  vie  with 
modern  scholars. 

The  chief  impulse  to  the  recent  activity  in  chronological  research  came  from  the 
publications  by  Hilprecht1  and  King,2  which  showed,  as  others  long  ago  had  assumed,3 
that  Bab>  Ionian  dynasties  overlapped  each  other.  The  consequences  of  this  dis- 
covery affect  the  old  Babylonian  chronology  in  general,  but  especially  and  in  the 
first  place  the  date  of  the  first  dynasty  of  Babylon.  On  the  more  or  less  definite 
determination  of  the  date  of  this  dynasty  depend  almost  exclusively  the  earlier 
Babylonian  dynasties,  and  among  them  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur,  which  is  the  oldest 
dynasty  of  Babylonia  that  at  present  can  lie  approximately  placed,  as  its  relation 
to  the  following  or  Isin  dynasty  is  now  exactly  known  by  the  new  chronological 
tablet,  published  by  Prof.  Hilprecht,4  while  the  relation  of  this  dynasty  to  the  first 
dynasty  of  Babylon,  on  the  other  hand,  can  be  very  approximately  determined. 

On  the  ground  of  the  new  chronological  material  recently  published  by  King,  this 
scholar  has  placed  the  beginning  of  the  first  dynasty  of  Babylon  at  about  2100  B.C.5 
Eduard  Meyer  has  not  only  accepted  the  conclusions  of  King  in  full,  but  he  seems 
to  place  even  more  reliance  on  doubtful  or  disputed  details." 

In  regard  to  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur,  King  incidentally  places  the  beginning 
of  it  at  about  2320  or  2330  B.C.7 ; Meyer  places  the  whole  dynasty  2304-2188  B.C.8 

Taking  the  conclusions  drawn  by  King  as  a starting  point,  we  note  that  his 
new  construction  of  old  Babylonian  chronology  principally  rests  on  three  stepping 
stones: 

(1)  The  end  of  the  third  or  Kassite  dynasty; 

(2)  The  immediate  succession  of  the  third  dynasty  on  the  first,  with  the  toted  elimina- 
tion of  the  second  dynasty,  the  dynasty  of  the  Sea-land,  and 

1 B.  E.,  XX1,  No.  47;  also  pp.  41ff.  and  46. 

2 Chronicles,  I,  pp.  70,  93,  97,  147ff.;  II,  p.  15ff. 

3 See  Hilprecht,  B.  E.,  XX1,  p.  43. 

4 B.  E.,  XX1,  No.  47 ; also  p.  46. 

6 Chronicles,  I,  pp.  126,  136,  137. 

0 See  Geschichte  des  Alt,.2, 12,  p.  341. 

7 Chronicles,  I,  p.  168,  8 Geschichte  des  A lt.2,  I2,  p.  344. 


3 


From  the  temple  archives  of  nippur. 

(3)  The  end  of  the  dynasty  of  Isin. 

Now,  as  for  the  end  of  the  third  or  Kassite  dynasty,  King  has  placed  this  event 
1160  B.C.,  but,  as  he  also  remarks,  the  exact  date  cannot  be  definitely  established.1 
Meyer,  on  the  other  hand,  places  it  as  high  as  1185, 2 while  Thureau-Dangin  gives  the 
date  1186, 3 not  to  speak  of  other  most  divergent  dates  advanced.4  Hilprecht5  and 
Hinke,6 7  however,  have  shown  that,  especially  on  account  of  the  statement  on  the 
new  boundary  stone  in  regard  to  Nebuchadrezzar  I,  the  end  of  the  third  dynasty  is 
to  be  placed  as  low  as  about  1140  B.C. 

The  total  elimination  of  the  second  dynasty,  as  far  as  the  sequence  of  the  first  and 
third  dynasties  is  concerned,  and  the  assumption  that  the  third  dynasty  followed 
immediately  on  the  first,  are,  of  course,  questions  of  more  important  and  far-reaching 
consequences  in  regard  to  the  construction  of  earlier  Babylonian  chronology.  King 
took  the  radical  step  to  eliminate  the  second  dynasty  altogether.  He  did  that  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  Ea-gdmil,  the  last  king  of  the  second  dynasty,  according  to 
the  new  chronological  material  he  produced,  is  found  to  be  a contemporary  of  Kas- 
tilias,2 the  Kassite.  Rather  than  taking  the  most  probable  course8  of  identifying 
this  Kastilias  with  the  third  king  of  the  Kassite  dynasty,  he  resorts  to  the  extreme 
means  of  creating  an  entirely  new  set  of  later  kings,  to  be  placed  in  the  gap  of  the 
Kings’  list.9 

The  chief  reason  for  the  elimination  of  the  second  dynasty,  and  an  argument 
on  which  King  lays  a great  deal  of  stress,  is  the  absence  so  far  of  any  positive  state- 
ment that  the  kings  of  the  second  dynasty  actually  ruled  over  Babylon  itself. 
Indeed  he  considers  this,  of  course,  quite  negative  proof  of  such  importance,  that 
the  more  positive  arguments  in  favor  of  the  identification  of  Kastilias,  the  con- 
temporary of  Ea-gdmil,  with  the  third  king  of  the  Kassite  dynasty  have  to  be  set 
aside,10  and  in  this  he  is  also  supported  by  Meyer.11 

Now  it  is  true  that  thus  far  we  do  not  have  any  positive  statement  in  the  inscrip- 

1 Chronicles,  I,  p.  110. 

2 Geschichte  des  Alt?,  I2,  p.  338. 

3Z.  A.,XXI,p.  185. 

4 See  Chronicles,  I,  p.  83;  Poebel,  Z.  A.,  XXI,  p.  167. 

5R.  E.,  XX1,  p.  44. 

6R.  E.,  Series  D,  IV,  p.  130ff. 

7 Thus  read  the  name  with  Thureau-Dangin,  0.  L.  Z.,  XI,  p.  31,  and  Hommel,  0.  L.  Z.,  XII,  p.  109,  instead  of 
King’s  Betiliash. 

8 See  Thureau-Dangin,  Z.  A.,  XXI,  p.  176ff.;  also  Ungnad,  O.  L.  Z.,  X,  p.  638. 

9 Chronicles,  I,  p.  113. 

10  Chronicles,  I,  p.  107. 

11  Geschichte  des  Alt.-,  I2,  p.  340. 


4 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 

tions  and  dated  documents  that  any  of  the  kings  of  the  second  dynasty  actually  ruled 
over  Babylon,  but,  as  a matter  of  fact,  we  know  very  little  about  these  kings  in 
any  respect.  It  is  a question,  on  which  further  excavations  and  new  material  no 
doubt  will  supply  more  definite  information.  As  long  as  we  have  no  positive  proof 
to  the  contrary,  the  mere  absence  of  a definite  statement  cannot,  of  course,  con- 
stitute a proof  that  none  of  these  kings  controlled  Babylon.  On  the  other  hand, 
as  has  been  pointed  out  before,1  the  very  presence  of  this  dynasty  in  a list,  otherwise 
including  only  such  dynasties  as  we  know  actually  controlled  Babylon,  would  be 
difficult  to  explain,  if  not  at  any  time  some  one  of  these  kings  ruled  in  Babylon. 
But,  of  course,  this  does  neither  prove  nor  disprove  the  supposition  that  Babylon 
for  a time  at  least  was  included  in  the  domain  of  the  second  dynasty. 

But  1 am  inclined  to  think  that  too  much  importance  has  been  placed  on  the 
question,  whether  this  dynasty  ruled  in  Babylon  or  not.  In  itself  it  does  not  solve 
the  problem  of  the  relation  between  the  first  and  third  dynasty.  King2  and  Meyer3 * 
assume  that  the  third  dynasty  followed  immediately  on  the  first.  But  in  this  respect 
they  seem  not  only  to  have  underestimated  the  Hittite  invasion  and  conquest  of 
Babylon,1  but  have  gone  so  far  as  practically  to  eliminate  its  consequence  on  the 
chronology  altogether.  It  is  most  difficult  to  see,  how  an  event  of  such  import- 
ance really  can  be  so  lightly  disposed  of  historically. 

The  conquest  of  Babylon,  with  the  position  this  city  had  obtained  in  Babylonia 
dur  ing  the  first  dynasty,  as  well  as  the  overthrow  of  this  dynasty,  would  naturally 
be  an  event  of  great  consequence.  It  is  therefore  difficult  to  see,  how  the  Hittites, 
according  to  the  natural  order  of  things,  could  have  been  content  only  to  make  such 
a conquest,  and  then  immediately  leave  another  people,  the  Kassites,  to  reap  the 
advantages  of  the  whole  conquest,  unless,  (what  has  not  been  shown),  the  Hittites 
and  the  Kassites  are  identical.  A people  like  the  Hittites,  being  able  to  conquer 
Babylon  and  overthrow  the  ruling  dynasty,  would  also  be  able  to  keep  the  conquered 
territory  in  their  hands,  at  least  for  some  time.  The  Hittites,  moreover,  were  no 
marauding  tribes  that  would  only  be  content  with  plunder.5  A Hittite  conquest 
and  the  overthrow  of  the  native  dynasty  would  naturally  have  as  a consequence  the 
establishment  of  Hittite  rule.  Hence  some  time  must  have  elapsed  between  the  end 
of  the  first  dynasty  and  the  beginning  of  the  rule  of  the  third  over  Babylon. 

On  account  of  the  facts,  set  forth  by  Prof.  Hilprecht,  B.  E.,  XX1,  pp.  44,  45, 

1 Poebel,  Z.  A.,  XXI,  p.  165;  also  Hilprecht,  B.  E.,  XX',  p.  42. 

2 Chronicles,  I2,  p.  10. 

3 Geschichte  des  Alt},  I2,  p.  341.  4 See  new  chronicle,  King,  Chronicles . II,  p.  22. 

6 See  Jastrow’s  Hittites  in  Babylonia,  R.  S.,  XVIII  (1910),  pp.  87ff.,  just  issued. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


5 


and  Hinke,  B.  E.,  Series  D,  pp.  130ff.,  viz.,  that  ( Agum-)Kakrime  11  probably  was 
the  first  emperor  of  Babylonia,”  among  the  members  of  the  Kassite  dynasty,  we 
possibly  may  have  to  bring  down  the  dates,  previous  to  the  Kassite  dynasty,  some 
decades. 

The  only  positive  chronological  data,  so  far  known,  by  which  we  can  be  guided 
in  an  attempt  to  calculate  the  length  of  the  apparent  gap  between  the  first  and 
third  dynasty,  are  the  facts  known  in  regard  to  the  second  dynasty  itself.  It  has 
never  been  questioned  that  the  Iluma-ilu,  who  according  to  the  new  chronicle  was 
a contemporary  of  Samsu-iluna  and  Abi-esu,  is  to  be  identified  with  the  first  king 
of  the  second  dynasty.1  Thus  the  beginning  of  this  dynasty  and  the  very  approxi- 
mate length  of  time  it  was  contemporaneous  with  the  first  dynasty  can  be  determined. 
But,  on  the  authority  of  the  same  material,  the  end  of  the  second  dynasty  and  the 
length  of  time  it  was  contemporaneous  with  the  third  dynasty  can  also  be  fixed. 

The  identification  of  Kastilias,  the  contemporary  of  Ea-gdmil,  last  king  of  the 
second  dynasty,2  with  the  third  king  of  the  third  dynasty  is  certain,  as  far  as  the 
material  now  at  hand  shows,  unless  we,  like  King,  and  more  recently  Hommel,3 
postulate  an  entirely  new  set  of  kings,  that  would  answer  the  conditions  required. 
That  Kastilias,  the  third  king  of  the  third  dynasty,  answers  the  statement  of  the  new 
chronicle,  or  that  he  was  the  son  of  Agum,  not  the  father,  as  the  kings’  list  erro- 
neously has  it,  is  now  established  without  a doubt  by  the  emendation  of  V R.,  33, 
col.  I,  according  to  King’s  collations  published  by  Hommel.4 

The  passage  relating  to  this  special  point  runs  as  follows: 

17  mar 5 Kas-tile-ia-su 

18  aplu  res-tu 

19  sd  A-gu-um  ra-bi-i 

20  zerum  el-lum  zer  sarruti(-ti) 

21  ta-mi-ih  sir-ri-ti 

22  mar 7 Gdn-di 

The  order  of  the  three  first  kings  of  the  third  dynasty  would  thus  be: 

1 Chronicles,  I,  pp.  70,  93,  97,  14711. ; II,  p.  15ff. 

2 Chronicles,  I,  p.  104ff.,  Ill,  113;  II,  p.  22ff. 

3 O.  L.  Z„  XII,  p.  110. 

40.  L.  Z.,XII,pp.  108-110. 

6 The  shin  is  TUR  = maru,  not  i. 

6 BI.BE.,  according  to  collation  by  King.  See  ibid.,  p.  109. 

7 Also  according  to  collation  by  King. 


6 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


(1)  Gandi  or  Gandas, 

(2)  Agum  the  great  or  first, 

(3)  Kastilias,  his  firstborn  son. 

Thus  if  we  can  within  a few  years1  determine  to  what  extent  the  second  dynasty 
overlapped  the  first  and  the  third,  the  balance  of  the  sum  total  of  the  years  attrib- 
uted to  the  second  dynasty  would,  of  course,  denote  the  time  that  elapsed  between 
the  end  of  the  first  and  beginning  of  the  third  dynasty.  For  this  calculation,  however, 
we  depend  entirely  on  the  figures  given  by  the  kings’  list.  The  chief  objection  to 
this  procedure  has  been  the  fact  that  these  figures  are  unusually  high.  Still  they 
are  not  impossible.  Of  eleven  kings  four  ruled  60,  56,  55  and  50  years  respectively, 
but  others  only  8,  15  and  20.  That  mistakes  occur  in  the  list  is  seen  from  the  fact  that 
that  to  Hammurabi  are  assigned  55  years,  while  according  to  the  date  lists  he  only 
ruled  43.  But  mistakes  of  reduction  are  also  found,  as  Ammi-ditana  is  given  only 
25  years  in  the  kings’  list,  while  he  actually  ruled  37 ; Abi-esu’  25  instead  of  28,  and 
Samsu-iluna  35  instead  of  38. 2 If  subtraction  has  to  be  made  from  the  sum  total  of 
these  years,  it  would  only  be  a question  of  a few  decades.  As  long  as  we  have  no 
positive  proof  to  the  contrary,  the  safest  course  is  to  be  guided  by  the  figures  given. 
As  Thureau-Dangin3  has  calculated,  we  would  have  a period  of  about  177  years  to 
be  accounted  for  between  the  first  and  third  dynasty. 

As  for  the  fall  of  I sin  and  the  overthrow  of  the  Isin  dynasty,  King  was  inclined 
to  join  those  two  events  and  to  identify  them  with  the  conquest  of  Isin  in  the  7th 
year  of  Hammurabi,  rather  than  with  the  same  event  recorded  as  taking  place  in  the 
seventeenth  year  of  Sin-muballit.4  Whether  the  conquest  of  the  city  of  Isin  in  any 
of  those  years  mentioned  also  marked  the  end  of  the  Isin  dynasty  or  not  has  not 
yet  been  definitely  proven.  The  dynasty  might  have  been  overthrown  at  some 
earlier  unknown  conquest.  These  are  two  events  that  will  have  to  be  distinguished 
and  kept  separate.  But  that  the  conquest  of  Isin  in  the  seventh  year  of  Hammurabi 
did  not  in  any  case,  as  was  quite  obvious  for  other  reasons,  refer  to  the  conquest 
of  Isin  by  Rim-Sin  is  absolutely  certain  from  the  date  formula  for  that  year: 

mu  Unu{g)ki  it  L-si-inH  ba-an-dib ,5 

which  shows  that  Hammurabi  took  the  city.  We  know  for  certain  that  Isin  also 
was  taken  before  that  time  by  Sin-muballit  in  his  seventeenth  year.0 

1 See  Thureau-Dangin,  Z.  A.;  Poebel,  Z.  .4.,  XXI,  p.  75;  B.  E.,  VI2,  p.  122. 

2 See  Chronicles,  1,  p.  95.  3 Z.  A.,  XXI,  p.  179. 

4 Chronicles,  1,  p.  lOOff.  5 See  Poebel,  B.  E.,  VI2,  p.  57. 

6 See  Pinches,  C.  T .,  VI,  PI.  9,  Bu.  91-5-9,  284,  O.,  44;  King,  L.  I.  II.,  II,  No.  101. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


7 


In  what  relation  his  conquest  of  the  city  really  stands  to  the  well-known  con- 
quest of  Isin  by  Rim-Sin,  and  which  must  have  occurred  about  the  same  time,  is 
another  question  to  consider.1  The  conquest  of  Isin  and  the  overthrow  of  its  vener- 
able dynasty,  however,  must  have  been  an  event  of  great  consequence ; and  as  for 
Rim-Sin,  it  was  the  occasion  for  instituting  a new  era.  Whether  the  dynasty  of 
Isin  actually  went  down  with  the  city  in  the  seventeenth  year  of  Sin-muballit  we 
do  not  know,  but  it  is  the  very  latest  date,  at  which  we  can  place  the  end  of  this 
dynasty. 

Thus  by  starting  as  low  as  possible,  or  placing  the  end  of  the  third  or  Ivassite 
dynasty  as  late  as  1140,  adding  577  years,  the  length  of  the  third  dynasty,  177  years 
to  be  accounted  for  between  the  third  and  first  dynasty,  201  years  up  to  the  seven- 
teenth year  of  Sin-muballit,  2254  years  for  the  dynasty  of  Isin,  and  117  years  for  the 
second  dynasty  of  Ur,2  we  would  have  to  place  the  beginning  of  the  last  mentioned 
dynasty  about  2408  B.C. 

This  calculation  would  place  the  beginning  of  the  first  dynasty  about  2147  B.C., 
the  reign  of  Hammurabi  about  2045-2003.  Hammurabi  would  then  very  well  come 
within  the  round  number  of  700  years  which,  according  to  the  scribes  of  Nabuna’id, 
separated  him  from  Burnaburias,  whom  even  Meyer  places  about  1380-1375.3 
Gulkisar  would  come  within  696  years  before  Nebukadrezzar  I,4  as  he  would  at 
least  have  ruled  down  to  1780,  which  also  is  the  date  assigned  to  him  by  Meyer.5 

These  dates  suggested  can  also  be  reconciled  with  the  more  trustworthy  new 
chronological  material  brought  to  light  by  the  German  excavations  in  Assyria.6  Sal- 
maneser  I states  that  he  rebuilt  the  temple  of  Assur,  which  had  once  been  built 
by  Uspia.  It  had  fallen  into  decay,  and  Eresu  rebuilt  it.  One  hundred  and  fifty- 
nine  years  passed  after  the  reign  of  Eresu  and  it  fell  into  decay,  and  Samsi-Adad 
rebuilt  it.  During  5S0  years  it  grew  old,  fire  broke  out,  and  after  that  Salmaneser  I 
restored  it.  According  to  figures  given,  Eresu  would  have  to  be  placed  within  739 
years  of  Salmaneser  I,  who,  according  to  Meyer,7  ruled  about  1300  B.C.  The  father 
of  Eresu  was  Ilu-suma,  who,  according  to  the  new  chronological  material  published 
by  King,8  was  a contemporary  of  Su-abu,  probably  identical  with  Sumu-abu,  the  first 

1 Cf.  Hilprecht,  B.  E.,  XX1,  p.  53ff.;  Poebel,  B.  E.,  VI2,  p.  1 1 3ff . ; Thureau-Dangin,  J.A.,  Ser.  X,  Vol.XIV,  pp.339ff. 

2 See  Hilprecht,  B.  E.,  XX1,  No.  47 ; also  p.  46. 

3 Geschichte  des  All.2, 12,  p.  335. 

4 See  King,  Chronicles,  I,  p.  89;  Hilprecht,  B.  E.,  XX1,  p.  42ff. 

5 Geschichte  des  Alt.2,  I2,  p.  585. 

6 See  M.  D.  O.  G.,  No.  21,  pp.  30,  34,  38,  40;  King,  Chronicles,  I,  p.  119ff. ; Meyer,  Geschichte  des  Alt.2,  I2,  p.  342. 

7 Geschichte  des  Alt.2,  I2,  pp.  338,  342. 

s Chronicles,  II,  p.  14, 


8 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


king  of  the  first,  dynasty.  Hence  the  first  dynasty  of  Babylon  would  have  begun 
about  2040,  the  reign  of  Eresu  and  Ilu-suma,  and  also  perhaps  a part  of  the  reign  of 
Sumu-abu.  But  in  addition  to  this  we  will  also  have  to  make  allowance  for  the  years 
the  temple  was  fallen  into  decay.  How  long  Eresu  and  his  father  ruled  we  do  not 
yet  know,  but  the  number  of  years  these  kings  ruled  and  the  years  of  the  decay  of 
the  temple,  and  the  uncertainties  of  other  chronological  figures  used  as  a basis,  may 
possibly  make  up  for  the  discrepancy  of  about  100  years. 

The  approximate  tlat.es,  as  far  as  the  chronological  material  at  hand  allows 
us  to  determine,  for  the  kings  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur  would  be  as  follows: 


Ur-Engur 2408-2390  B.C. 

Dungi 2390-2332  B.C. 

Bur-Sin 2332-2323  B.C. 

Gimil-Sin 2323-2316  B.C. 

Ibi-Sin 2316-2291  B.C. 


II. 


THE  TABLETS. 


The  clay  tablets,  inscribed  with  old  Babylonian  cuneiform  characters  and  written 
in  the  Sumerian  language,  now  published  for  the  first  time  in  this  volume,  belong 
to  the  large  and  in  many  respects  unrivalled  collection  of  cuneiform  tablets  in  The 
Free  Museum  of  Science  and  Art  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania  in 
Philadelphia.  With  two  exceptions  only,  Nos.  132  and  155,  they  were  excavated 
in  the  ruins  of  Nippur,  in  central  Babylonia,  during  the  first  three  expeditions  of 
the  University  of  Pennsylvania,  viz.,  1888-89,  1889-90  and  1893-96  respectively.1 
The  documents  published  in  this  volume,  however,  constitute  only  a part  of  the 
tablets  from  this  period,  preserved  in  the  Philadelphia  Museum.  Documents  of  the 
same  character,  from  the  same  period  and  in  part  even  found  in  the  same  mounds, 
were  also  excavated  during  the  fourth  expedition  to  Nippur.2  These  tablets  will  be 
included  in  volumes  to  follow. 

As  could  be  gathered  from  the  careful  description  of  the  tablets  in  The  Catalogue 
of  the  Babylonian  and  General  Semitic  Section  of  the  Museum , prepared  by  the  Curator, 
Prof.  H.  V.  Hilprecht,  the  larger  part  or  136  of  the  tablets,  here  published,  were  dug 
up  during  the  second  expedition  to  Nippur  (1889-90).  From  the  first  expedition 
(1888-89)  came  only  8 tablets,  Nos.  1,  5,  13,  66,  84,  91,  151  and  170;  while  from  the 
third  expedition  thus  far  we  have  25  tablets,  namely,  Nos.  3,  4,  8,  11,  12,  14,  15,  16, 
19,  29,  30,  36,  40,  41,  42,  46,  55,  70,  86,  95,  116,  125,  133  and  135.  Two  tablets  were 
purchased  in  Nippur:  No.  132  by  Dr.  Haynes  during  the  third  expedition  and  said 
to  come  from  Yokha  or  Telloh;  No.  155  by  Dr.  Peters  from  Mr.  Noorian,  the  inter- 
preter of  the  first  two  expeditions,  during  the  second  campaign.  Worthy  of  notice 
is  the  fact,  that  most  of  the  more  interesting  tablets  in  this  volume,  or  the  so-called 
“contracts,”  were  unearthed  during  the  first  and  third  expeditions.3 

1 See  Peters,  Nippur  or  Explorations  and  Adventures  on  the  Euphrates,  and  Hilprecht,  The  Excavations  in  Assyria 
and  Babylonia  ( The  Babylonian  Expedition  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania , Series  D,  Vol.  I),  pp.  289-5GS. 

2 Cf.  Hilprecht,  B.  E.,  Series  D,  I,  p.  488,  and  Th.  S.-C.,  P.  II.  C.,  p.  195. 

3 See  Hilprecht,  B.  E.,  Series  D,  I,  pp.  297-319  and  345-425. 

2 [9] 


10 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


As  the  Nippur  tablets,  here  treated,  vary  in  contents,  it  would  be  of  great  interest 
to  know  the  exact  places  of  discovery  in  the  many  elevations  and  depressions  of 
certain  parts  of  the  ruins  of  Nippur,  and  to  ascertain,  in  what  environments  and 
under  what  general  conditions  they  were  found.  Thus  it  would  be  interesting  to 
learn,  whether  the  so-called  “contract”  tablets  were  found  in  the  same  places  as 
the  tablets  containing  various  accounts,  and  whether  these  two  kinds  of  tablets  were 
found  apart  from  or  intermingled  with  each  other.  But  unfortunately,  no  Assyri- 
ologist.  being  present  during  the  second  and  third  expeditions,  no  records  of  this 
kind  could  be  kept  by  Dr.  Peters  and  Dr.  Haynes,  who,  moreover,  at  times  worked 
at  Nippur  under  very  trying  circumstances. 

From  the  Catalogue  of  the  Philadelphia  Museum,  which  also  states  the  different 
expeditions  during  which  the  tablets  were  found,  from  the  descriptions  of  the  exca- 
vations by  Peters1  and  Hilprecht,2  as  well  as  from  the  large  raised  map  of  the  ruins 
of  Nippur3  in  the  University  Museum,  where  by  cuts  or  different  colors  the  work 
of  the  four  expeditions  is  designated,  and  also  from  personal  information  kindly 
furnished  by  Prof.  Hilprecht,  some  facts  at  least  can  be  gathered  in  regard  to  the 
mounds,  where  these  tablets  were  dug  up. 

During  the  first  campaign  most  of  the  tablets  unearthed  in  Nippur,  according 
to  Peters,4  came  from  the  so-called  “Tablet  Hill,”  the  site  of  the  earlier  “Temple 
Library,”  the  lull  at  present  marked  IV  on  the  Museum  map  and  Hilprecht’s  repro- 
duction of  it,,5  but  Y on  the  same  plan  given  by  Peters.6  This  is  the  most  southeast 
mound  of  the  ruins  of  Nippur  on  the  east  side  of  the  Satt  en-Nil. 

According  to  information  from  Prof.  Hilprecht,  no  dated  administrative  docu- 
ments from  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur  came  from  this  section  of  the  ruins  during  the 
first  campaign,  when  he  was  at  Nippur  personally.  The  eight  tablets  then  found 
came  exclusively  from  the  long  trench  cut  in  the  southern  slope  of  the  long  ridge 
on  the  west  side  of  the  Satt  en-Nil,  opposite  “Tablet  Hill.”7 

While  the  few  tablets  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur,  discovered  in  a trial  trench 
by  the  first,  expedition,  evidently  were  found  out  of  place  in  the  general  layer  of  that 
period,  the  second  expedition  reached  the  very  rooms,  in  which  they  once  had  been 

1 Nippur. 

2 B.  E .,  Series  D,  I,  pp.  289-568. 

3 Made  by  Charles  Muret,  Paris,  under  the  direction  of  Percy  Hastings  Field,  architect. 

4 Nippur,  I,  p.  247. 

5 B.  E.,  Series  D,  I,  p.  305. 

6 Nippur,  Vol.  I,  pp.  242,  243. 

7 Cf.  Peters,  Nippur,  Vol.  II,  the  plan  facing  p.  194,  and  Hilprecht,  B.  E.,  Series  D,  I,  p.  305.  In  Peters’  map 
the  mound  Is  called  N;  on  Hilprecht’s  No.  VI. 


PROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OP  NIPPUR. 


11 


stored,  at  a point  marked  E on  the  plan  given  by  Peters;1  for,  according  to  Hilprecht’s 
deciphering  of  the  tablets,  reported  by  Peters  to  have  come  from  a certain  level  of 
that  section  of  the  ruins,  they  were  dated  according  to  kings  of  the  second  dynasty 
of  Ur  and  according  to  events  characteristic  of  their  reigns.3 

During  the  third  campaign  Haynes  also  excavated  thousands  of  tablets  in  the 
same  mound,  VI  (IX),  on  the  west  side  of  Salt  en-Nil,3  and  among  them  again  were 
numerous  tablets  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur.4  According  to  Hilprecht,  the  mound 
IV  (V)  or  1 ‘Tablet  Hill”  was  seemingly  not  touched  at  all,  or  only  very  slightly0  by 
Haynes  during  the  third  campaign.  To  judge  from  the  colors  on  the  map  of  the  ruins, 
provided  by  Mr.  C.  S.  Fisher  to  indicate  the  work  of  the  different  campaigns,  some 
kind  of  excavations  were  indeed  made  in  this  mound  during  the  third  expedition, 
but  evidently  without  yielding  any  of  the  documents  included  in  this  volume. 

As  to  size,  shape,  make-up  and  paleographical  character,  these  tablets 
share  the  peculiarities  of  similar  documents  from  this  period  already  published. 
The  comparative  absence,  however,  of  large  many-columned  account  tablets,7  which 
occur  in  the  Telloh  collections  frequently,  8 and  also  of  round-shaped  field  accounts,9 
is  to  be  noted. 

As  to  their  state  of  preservation,  many  of  these  tablets  show  evidence  of 
having  been  roughly  handled  by  the  vicissitudes  that  befell  the  ancient  city  with  its 
temple  library  and  archives.  In  this  respect  the  Telloh  tablets,  to  judge  from  the 
published  texts,  seem  to  have  fared  better.  All  the  Nippur  tablets  with  but  one 
exception  are  baked,  but,  like  many  similar  Telloh  tablets,  there  is  a certain  number 
made  from  a kind  of  clay  that  now  is  crumbling. 

Most  of  the  smaller  tablets,  which  no  doubt  originally  were  enclosed  in  cases 
or  envelopes,  have  seal  impressions.  A certain  small  group  of  tablets  made  of 
the  same  kind  of  clay,  similarly  shaped  and  inscribed  but  not  ruled,  is  covered  with 
seal  impressions  that  mar  the  writing  and  make  the  decipherment  a very  difficult 
task.  These  tablets  had  apparently  never  been  enclosed  in  envelopes.  As  a rule 
the  seal  impressions  on  the  tablets  of  this  volume  are  very  faint  and  indistinct, 

1 Nippur,  Vol.  II,  facing  p.  172. 

2 B.  E.,  Series  D,  p.  343. 

3 Cf.  B.  E.,  Series  D,  I,  pp.  353,  364. 

4 Ibid.,  p.  408. 

5 Ibid.,  p.  431. 

8Cf.  Th.  S.-C.  P.  II.  C.,  p.  287. 

7 According  to  Hilprecht  there  are  a number  of  large  fragments  of  this  class  known  to  him  among  the  uncata- 
logued material. 

8 See  especially  the  T.  T.  and  II.  L.  G.  editions. 

9 See  especially  C.  T .,  I. 


12 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


so  that  it  is  almost  impossible  to  trace  them  satisfactorily.  In  such  cases  I have 
not  undertaken  to  restore  the  seals,  although  this,  of  course,  can  easily  be  done  from 
the  names  on  the  tablet.  A few  impressions,  however,  are  clear  and  distinct,  and 
these  are  reproduced.  The  seals  represent  the  picture  characteristic  of  the  second 
dynasty  of  Ur.  The  moon  god  is  sitting  on  his  throne.  A worshipper  is  led  into  his 
presence  by  a priest  and  is  followed  by  another.  In  accordance  with  the  contents 
and  character  of  the  tablets,  most  of  the  seals  are  dub-sar  seals.1  One  document 
has  the  seal  of  a patesi,2  while  another3  has  the  seal  of  a judge. 

As  the  title  of  the  volume  indicates,  all  these  tablets  were  made  and  inscribed 
during  the  reigns  of  the  kings  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur,  or  during  the  second  half 
of  the  third  millennium  B.C.  About  half  of  the  number  are  duly  dated,  and  may 
thus  be  assigned  to  this  period  without  the  slightest  hesitation,  while  the  undated 
documents  have  to  be  classified  principally  on  the  basis  of  their  paleographical 
characteristics,  their  proper  names  and  contents.  The  sifting  and  cataloguing  of 
the  immense  mass  of  material  in  the  Museum  is  exclusively  done  by  Prof.  Hilprecht. 
With  his  unrivalled  experience  and  skill  in  deciphering  original  cuneiform  script, 
older  and  later,  he  also  classified,  catalogued  and  assigned  to  the  proper  historical 
period  the  tablets  here  published.  After  a careful  examination  and  study  of  every 
tablet,  I have  no  occasion  to  differ  from  his  in  this  respect  almost  unerring  judgment. 

1 See  No.  32.  Cf.  also  the  seals  reproduced  by  Pinches  in  the  Amherst  volume. 

2 See  No.  13. 

3 See  No.  14. 


III. 


SIMILAR  TABLETS. 


In  regard  to  their  contents,  these  tablets  will  have  to  be  classed  together  with  other 
collections  of  tablets  from  the  same  period  already  published  by  others.  But  while 
they  contain,  of  course,  material  of  a character  similar  to  that  of  the  texts  published 
before,  they  also,  as  will  be  found,  furnish  a good  deal  of  new  information  of  special 
interest  for  the  time,  to  which  they  belong. 

The  first  tablets  of  a similar  character  from  this  period  of  Babylonian  history 
were  published  by  Prof.  Hilprecht.  As  early  as  1893-96  he  published  the  first  ordinary 
clay  tablets  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur,  together  with  other  older  Babylonian 
inscriptions,  in  “B.  E.,”  Vol.  I,  Parts  1-2.  Cf.  Nos.  124-127  and  such  other  inscrip- 
tions from  the  Ur  period  as  Part  1 (1893),  Nos.  14  (a  basalt  tablet),  15  (an  agate 
tablet),  16  (a  soapstone  tablet),  20,  21  (door-sockets),  and  22  (a  brick),  and  Nos.  121 
(a  door-socket)  and  122,  123  (soapstone  tablets). 

Publications  of  texts  and  also  transcriptions,  translations  and  treatments  of 
sundry  documents  from  this  period  were  made  in  different  journals  and  published 
works,  as  in  Recueil  de  Travaux,  etc.,  by  Halevy,  Yol.  XI  (1889),  pp.  17 Iff. ; by  Scheil, 
Vol.  XVII  (1895),  pp.  27ff.,  Vol.  XVIII  (1896),  pp.  64ff.,  and  also  scattered  through 
his  “Notes  d’  epigraphie  et  d’ archeologie  Assyrienne ” in  the  same  journal,  Vols.  XVII- 
XXII;  in  Revue  d’Assyriologie,  etc.,  by  Thureau-Dangin,  Vol.  Ill  (1895),  pp.  llSff., 
and  Vol.  V.  (1902),  pp.  67ff. ; in  Revue  Semitique,  by  Virolleaud,  Vol.  XI  (1893-1902), 
pp.  76ff.  and  180ff. ; in  Zeitschrift  fur  Assyriologie  by  Scheil,  Vol.  XII  (1897),  pp. 
260ff.,  and  Delaporte,  Vol.  XVIII  (1904-05),  pp.  252ff. ; in  Comptes  rendus  by  Thureau- 
Dangin  (1896);  in  Orientalistische  Litteraturzeitung  by  the  same  author,  Vol.  I,  pp. 
16 Iff . ; in  Keilinschriftliche  Bibliothek  by  Winckler,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  76  (1902). 

The  most  recent  contributions  to  the  literature  from  the  Ur  period,  and  which 
have  come  into  my  hands  only  while  reading  the  proofs,  are  by  Delaporte,  Em- 
preintes  de  Cachets  de  la  Collection  Amherst,  pp.  101-104;  Genouillac,  Tahlettes  d'Ur, 
pp.  137-141;  and  Huber,  Die  Altbabylonischen  Dahrlehnstexte  aus  der  Nippur-Samm- 

[13] 


14 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


lung  im  K.  0.  Museum  in  Konstantinopel,  pp.  189-222,  all  included  in  the  magnificent 
Hilprecht  Anniversary  Volume  (1909)  just  issued. 

Complete  collections  of  documents  of  the  same  special  character  as  the  tablets 
published  in  this  volume  began  to  lie  published  in  1896.  Thus  we  have  to  note  the 
small  collection  published  by  \V.  R.  Arnold  in  his  dissertation  for  the  doctorate  at 
the  Columbia  University  Ancient  Babylonian  Temple  Records  in  the  Columbia  Uni- 
versity Library,  New  York,  1896. 

In  the  same  year  the  British  Museum  commenced  the  publication  of  its  Cunei- 
form Texts  from  Babylonian  Tablets  in  the  British  Museum,  of  which  Vols.  I,  III,  V, 
VII,  IX  and  X,  copied  by  King,  contain  documents  from  the  Ur  period.  Unfor- 
tunately, on  account  of  the  fact  that  at  first,  the  material  submitted  was  not 
arranged  or  numbered,  these  otherwise  excellently  edited  volumes  are  most  difficult 
to  handle.  Hence  it  is  most  gratifying  to  note  that  this  quite  formal  defect  has 
been  remedied  in  later  volumes,  and  especially  in  the  latest,  or  XXVI,  where  not 
only  the  texts,  but  also  an  extensive  introduction,  accompanied  by  translations  and 
notes,  as  well  as  by  beautifully  made  photographic  reproductions,  are  presented. 
A study  of  these  texts  has  recently  been  made  by  Deimel,  Zeitschrift  fur  Assyri- 
ologie,  Vol.  XXII,  pp.  17ff. 

As  an  appendix  to  his  Early  Babylonian  History,  Radau  published  The  E.  A. 
Hoffman  Collection  of  Babylonian  Clay  Tablets  in  the  General  Theological  Seminary, 
New  York  City,  New  York,  1900,  which  for  the  greater  part  belong  to  the  period  of 
the  second  dynasty  of  Ur. 

Reisner  published  a large  and  well-edited  collection  of  tablets  of  this  character 
and  period  from  the  Konigliche  Museen,  Berlin,  in  his  Tempelurkunden  aus  Telloh 
(M itteilungen  aus  den  Orientalischen  Sammlungen,  Heft  XVI),  Berlin,  1901. 

Thureau-Dangin  published  a collection  of  old  Babylonian  tablets  from  the 
Louvre,  Paris,  and  the  Imperial  Ottoman  Museum,  Constantinople,  in  Recueil  de 
Tablettes  Chaldeenncs,  Paris,  1903.  Of  these  tablets  (a  large  number  of  which  he  had 
published  before  in  Revue  d' Assyriologie)  a part  of  the  4th,  the  5th  and  6th  series 
date  from  the  Ur  period. 

Virolleaud  edited  a small  volume  of  Ur  texts,  principally  documents,  of  which 
the  texts  had  been  published  before,  but  which  he  now  transliterated  and  translated 
under  the  title  Comptabilite  Chaldeenne , Parts  I and  II,  Poitiers,  1903,  and  in  the 
same  year  another  small  volume  of  similar  texts,  likewise  published  before  by  Scheil 
and  Thureau-Dangin,  entitled  Di-tilla,  textes  juridiques  chaldeennes,  Poitiers,  1903. 

In  1905 (?) — no  date  is  to  be  found  in  the  volume  itself — Prof.  Barton  pub- 
lished the  first  part  of  his  Haverford  Library  Collection  of  Cuneiform  Tablets,  being 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


15 


tablets  from  the  Ur  period,  said  to  have  been  dug  up  at  Telloh.  To  judge  from 
the  copies  the  Haverforcl  Library  possesses  a collection  of  unusually  large,  carefully 
inscribed  and  well  preserved  tablets.  Most  unfortunately,  however,  this  volume 
has  been  subjected  to  very  severe  criticism  on  account  of  the  many  mistakes  in 
the  copies  as  well  as  hasty  and  erroneous  interpretations. 

A more  careful  and  reliable  edition  of  Babylonian  tablets,  bought  from  dealers 
and  presented  to  American  institutions,  is  the  collection  of  Ur  tablets  published  by 
Lau  in  his  Old  Babylonian  Temple  Records,  New  York,  1906.  The  tablets  published 
in  that  volume  belong  to  the  Columbia  University.  The  collection  was  bought  in 
1896  from  Noorian,  formerly  interpreter  with  the  Babylonian  expeditions  of  the 
University  of  Pennsylvania.  The  tablets  are  represented  as  coming  from  Telloh, 
but  it  is  quite  certain  that  at  least  some  of  them  have  come  from  Nippur. 

Pinches  published  a beautifully  made-up  volume  entitled  The  Amherst  T ablets, 
London,  1908,  “being  an  account  of  the  Babylonian  inscriptions  in  the  collection 
of  the  Bight  Hon.  Lord  Amherst  of  Hackney,  F.S.A.,  at  Didlington  Hall,  Norfolk.” 
Among  the  tablets  published  in  this  volume  more  than  a hundred  are  Ur  tablets. 

Pelagaud  published  in  transliteration  and  translation,  with  an  introduction, 
notes,  indexes  and  in  part  the  cuneiform  texts,  a revised  edition  of  texts  previously 
published  and  translated  by  Scheil,  Thureau-Dangin  and  Yirolleaud,  in  his  Sa-tilla, 
textes  iuridiques,  etc.,  Babyloniaca . Tome  III,  2,  Paris,  1909. 

Lastly,  Barton  has  published  a second  part  of  his  Haverforcl  Library  Collection 
of  Cuneiform  Tablets,  Part  II,  Philadelphia  (1909).  This  volume  contains  ninety- 
four  tablets,  all  of  which  are  from  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur,  and  said  to  have  come  from 
Telloh.  This  second  volume  is  done  with  more  care  than  the  first.  Barton  has 
also  given  a list  of  corrections  in  regard  to  his  first  volume.  The  list  is  not  complete, 
however. 

It  is  a cause  of  regret  that  I have  not  been  able  to  get  access  to  the  volume  of 
old  Babylonian  tablets  preserved  in  the  Eremitage,  St.  Petersburg,  in  order  to  ascer- 
tain whether  it  contains  any  tablets  from  this  period. 


IV. 


THE  SUBJECT  MATTER. 


As  to  the  content,  or  subject  matter  of  the  tablets,  published  in  this  volume, 
the  comparatively  large  number  of  so-called  “contract”  tablets  is  to  be  especially 
noted.  Tablets  of  this  character  from  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur  have  so  far  been 
rather  rare.  Though  about  1,500  tablets  have  already  been  published  or  described 
in  catalogues,  there  are  only  about  a score  of  “contracts”  among  them.1 

The  Hoffman  collection,  containing  about  165  tablets  from  this  period  and 
partly  described  and  partly  published  by  Radau,2  has  not  a single  contract.  Among 
the  267  tablets  published  by  the  British  Museum  there  is  none,  in  spite  of  the  term 
“contracts”  in  the  preface  to  Parts  I,  III,  V,  VII.  Nor  is  there  a single  “contract” 
among  the  211  tablets  published  by  Barton.3  Neither  is  there  any  one  among  the 
254  tablets  described  or  published  by  Lau,  nor  among  the  120  Amherst  tablets. 
Among  Reisner’s  310  numbers  there  is  a single  “contract,”  No.  51,  probably  a 
sale  of  sheep.  Broken  as  it  is,  the  true  character  of  the  document  escaped  even 
the  otherwise  so  keen  and  observant  eye  of  Reisner.  The  collection  published  by 
Tlmreau-Dangin,  however,  have  among  its  171  tablets  from  this  period  eight  “con- 
tracts.” With  these  few  exceptions  all  these  tablets  are  account,  and  receipts  of 
various  kinds.4 

The  fact  that  among  the  tablets,  excavated  by  the  Philadelphia  expeditions, 
there  is  a comparatively  large  number  of  these  rare  documents  from  the  second 
dynasty  of  Ur  will  again  tend  to  accentuate  the  interesting  and  valuable  character 
of  the  Nippur  collections. 

1 Pelagaud  lias  recently  collected  and  practically  republished  all  of  them,  twenty-two  in  number,  in  his  Sa-tilla 
texts.  See  Chapter  III. 

2 For  this  and  the  following  collections  published  see  Chapter  III. 

3 The  tablets  which  Barton  represents  and  translates  as  “ an  appointment  to  a clerkship,”  H.  L.  C .,  I,  p.  10,  and 
“the  establishment  of  a Food  Office”  (corrected  to  business),  are  only  accounts.  Cf.  the  similar  tablets  T.  T . , 1641"6, 8; 
Amh.,  121. 

4 According  to  the  Catalogue  of  the  Morgan  collection  in  New  York,  made  by  Johns,  Nos.  49,  70,  71 , 85,  86,  87,  88 
and  108,  all  from  this  period,  are  “contracts.”  Some  of  them  have  been  already  published  by  Scheil,  No.  108,  in  R.  T 
XVII,  p.  38,  and  Nos.  70,  71  in  R.  T.,  XIX,  p.  63. 


[16] 


1 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR.  17 

Among  the  171  numbers  published  in  this  volume  about  thirty  are  “contract” 
tablets.  Some  of  them,  however,  are  fragmentary  and  their  specific  character 
cannot  be  determined  definitely.  The  balance  are  accounts  of  various  kinds.  The 
term  “contract”  I understand  to  mean  a document  recording  a legal  or  business 
transaction,  or  some  agreement  between  different  parties,  in  regard  to  which  a docu- 
ment is  legally  drawn  up,  signed  and  attested. 

Into  the  collection  here  published  has  also  strayed  a very  fragmentary  tablet, 
No.  154,  which  is  of  special  interest,  as  it  is  a fragment  of  a literary  tablet1  dating 
from  this  early  period. 

Fragment  of  a Literary  Tablet.2 


[ ] 

[ ] [s]u  zu[ ] 

[ ] s[u  u¥  ri-[ ] 

[ ] ni  za  ib-[ ] 

5.  [ ] ni  za  ib-[ ] 

[....]  clurnu  ama  nu-tug  [....] 

[ ] Pi-Pi  iH ] 

[ u]m-mi  dug-[ ] 

[ ]se  ib-[ ] 

10.  [ e]n  [ ] 

[ ] 

[ ] 


As  easily  seen,  the  fragmentary  condition  of  the  tablet  renders  any  attempt 
of  a translation  or  interpretation  impossible,  but  that  it  is  of  a literary  character 
seems  certain.  The  ib  at  the  end  of  the  broken  lines  3,  4,  5,  7 and  9 is,  of  course,  a 
verbal  prefix.  The  nu-tug,  line  6,  followed  by  dumu,  “son,”  and  ama,  “mother,”  looks 
like  a negative  followed  by  the  verb  or  “not”  and  some  form  of  the  verb  “to  lie.” 

As  far  as  paleographical  and  archaeological  evidences  tend  to  show,  the  tablet 
was  written  during  the  period  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur,  and  would  thus  form 
another  link  in  the  arguments  as  to  the  age  of  Babylonian  literature,3  definitely 
showing,  that  literary  documents  existed  as  far  back  as  in  the  period  of  the  second 
dynasty  of  Ur. 

1 For  another  tablet  of  this  kind  in  the  Nippur  collections  of  the  Imperial  Ottoman  Museum  in  Constantinople, 
cf.  Huber  in  Hilprecht  Anniversary  Volume,  pp.  22Qff. 

2 See  PI.  67,  No.  154,  and  Description  of  Tablets,  Chapter  XI. 

3 Cf.  Hilprecht,  B.  E.,  Series  A,  Vol,  XX,  pp.  1-10. 

3 


18 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


As  for  a general  survey  of  the  subject  matter  of  the  tablets  of  this  volume,  the 
following  may  be  noted 


Court  proceedings : 

Legal  documents  in  regard  to  slaves Nos.  1 (I),  4 (III). 

Legal  document  in  regard  to  an  office No.  2 (II). 

Contracts: 

Agreements  between  parties Nos.  4,  10. 

Documents  of  sale: 

Deed  of  sale  of  palm  grove No.  14  (VII). 

Deed  of  sale  of  a male  slave No.  15  (VIII). 

Receipt  of  purchase  money  for  a pair  of  slaves No.  16  (IX) . 


Loan  documents: 

Documents  in  regard  to  loans  of  silver Nos.  19  (?) , 20,  21. 

Promissory  notes Nos.  11  (V),  13  (VI). 

Acknowledgments  of  loans  of  silver Nos.  11  (V),  17-20,  22  (X),  29  (XIII). 

Acknowledgments  of  loans  of  grain Nos.  23  (XI),  24  (XII). 

Acknowledgment  of  loan  of  dates No.  31. 

A bond No.  7 (IV). 

Fragmentary  ‘ ‘contracts” : 

Only  parts  of  tablets  remaining,  the  names  of  witnesses  indicating 

the  character  of  the  documents Nos.  3,  5,  8,  9,  12. 


Account  of  loans  ( or  payments ) 

Receipts:2 

Receipt  for  silver 

Receipts  for  corn 

Receipt  for  wheat 

Receipts  for  grains 

Receipts  for  vegetables  of  various  kinds 
Receipts  for  different  kinds  of  beans. . . . 

Receipt  for  dates 

Receipts  for  figs 

Receipts  for  provisions 

Receipts  for  straw 


No.  56. 


No.  29  (XIII). 

. . . .Nos.  34,  37-39,  43,  45. 

No.  36. 

Nos.  30,  32,  35,  40,  41,  48. 

Nos.  47,  49,  53. 

Nos.  44,  45. 

No.  31. 

No.  54. 

No.  35. 

No.  48. 


1 For  a more  detailed  description  of  the  contents  of  every  tablet  see  the  Description  of  the  Tablets,  Chapter  XI. 

2 Some  of  these  receipts  may  be  acknowledgments  of  loans, 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


19 


Accounts  of  income: 

Accounts  of  the  receipts  for  corn Nos.  37,  etc. 

Account  of  the  receipts  for  bronze Nos.  71-74. 

Accounts  of  supplies  received  and  at  hand: 

Statement  of  silver,  corn,  oil,  etc.,  received  and  at  hand No.  151. 

Statements  of  shiploads  of  grain  delivered Nos.  60,  66. 

Statement  of  corn,  wheat  and  vegetables  delivered  and  at  hand Nos.  63,  65. 

Statement  of  garments  at  hand No.  143. 

Statement  of  chairs  on  hand No.  62. 

Storehouse  accounts: 

Account  of  corn No.  119. 

Account  of  corn  and  wheat Nos.  67,  84,  100-104. 

Account  of  grain Nos.  56,  58. 

Account  of  beans No.  68. 

Account  of  vegetables No.  169. 

Account  of  figs,  dates,  etc No.  105. 

Account  of  bronze No.  71. 

Account  of  grain  received  and  paid  out Nos.  57-59. 

Unique  account  of  a fruit  harvest No.  76  (XVIII). 

Cattle  accounts: 

A “ round  up”  of  cattle No.  79  (XIX). 

Various  cattle  accounts Nos.  80-82. 

Field  accounts: 

Accounts  of  the  cost  of  the  tilling  of  fields,  as  wages,  feed  of  oxen, 

seed,  etc Nos.  83,  89,  90  (XX),  91  (XXI). 

Renting  of  fields  to  different  persons No.  144. 

Account  of  fields,  their  measurements,  condition,  etc No.  91. 

Inventories: 

Enumeration  of  belongings,  as  implements,  weapons,  victuals,  silver, 

cattle,  skins,  etc Nos.  76,  77  (XVIII). 

Memoranda Nos.  6 (XXIV),  155. 

Accounts  of  expenditures: 

Expenditures  of  corn No.  135. 

Expenditures  of  different  kinds  of  grain No.  129  (XXI). 

Various  expenditures  of  corn  and  wheat;  among  these  are  1 gur  wheat 

for  porphyry  stone  for  a couch  for  the  god  Nusku No.  1 17. 

Expenditure  of  wool. No.  134  (XXIII). 


20 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OE  UR 


Assignments  of  garments Nos.  137-142. 

Expenditures  of  sesam Nos.  134,  136. 

Expenditure  of  sesam  oil No.  125. 

Expenditure  of  straw No.  161. 

Special  temple  accounts: 

.Grain  for  the  temple  of  En-lil No.  131. 

Grain  for  temple  offerings No.  88. 

Flour  and  grain  for  temple  offerings No.  132  (XXII). 

Temple  offerings  and  porphyry  stone  for  couches  for  the  deities No.  133. 

Accounts  of  expenditures  of  supplies  to  special  persons  named,  as  usages  or 
for  sustenance: 

Expenditures  and  distributions  of  grain. . .Nos.  85,  93-95,  97,  147,  149,  165,  166. 

Distribution  of  grain  and  vegetables Nos.  53,  63,  65,  146,  148. 

Distribution  of  fish No.  106. 

Distribution  of  drink No.  120  (XX). 

Pay-lists: 

Lists  of  officials,  employes,  artisans  and  laborers,  generally  the  amount 

of  wages  being  stated Nos.  88,  96,  107-110,  123,  170. 

Various  accounts: 

Accounts,  the  character  of  which  cannot  be  definitely  determined  on 

account  of  the  broken  condition  of  the  tablets 

Nos.  61,  69,  72,  86,  98,  111,  114,  145,  152,  171. 
Fragments Nos.  157-159,  164. 


V. 

DATES. 


One  of  the  most  valuable  features  of  these  documents,  especially  for  the  recon- 
struction of  Old  Babylonian  history,  are,  of  course,  the  dates.  Of  the  171  tablets, 
published  in  this  volume,  about  115  are  more  or  less  completely  dated.  Some  have 
complete  dates,  giving  year,  month  and  day,  others  year  and  month,  others  year, 
and  five  give  only  month  and  day.  The  rest,  or  about  56,  are  either  originally 
undated  or  the  dates  are  broken  away. 

As  for  the  dates  themselves,  most  of  them  were,  of  course,  known  before,  either 
as  certain  or  uncertain  dates,  but  there  are  also  to  be  found  entirely  new  dates,  as 
well  as  new  variations  of  previously  known  date  formulas.1 

The  certain  and  known  dates  represent  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Dungi, 
from  the  35th  to  the  53d  year  of  his  reign,  with  documents  from  every  year  men- 
tioned except  the  38th,  39th,  42d,  43d  and  48th-52d  years;  the  entire  reign 
of  Bur-Sin  except  his  4th  year;  the  whole  of  Gimil-Sin,  and  the  1st  year  of  Ibi-Sm, 
thus  covering  a period  of  at  least  45  years.  The  dates  found  in  this  volume,  giving 
year,  month  and  day,  are  the  following: 


Certain  Dates. 


Dates  from  the  reign  of  Dungi. 


35th:2  mu  Si-mu-ru-umki  ba-hul : 


itu  Ezen-dN  in-a-zu 

itu  [ Ezen-]mah 

itu  As-a,  ud  X -f 

itu  Engar-du-a,  ud  XIX 
itu  Se-kin-kud,  udVIII . 


No.  17. 

No.  57. 

No.  111.. 

Nos.  23  (XI),  24  (XII). 
No.  79  (XIX). 


1 See  New  dales  and  New  variations  of  known  dates,  p.  27. 

2 For  the  identification  and  the  chronological  order  of  the  dates  see  next  chapter,  Reconstruction  of  the  Dates  of 
the  Second  Dynasty  of  Ur. 


[21] 


22  SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 

(No  day) No.  80. 

itu  Ezen-dMe-ki-gal,  (no  day) No.  81. 

36th:  muus-sa  Si-mu-ru-umH  ba-hul:1 

itu  Bar-zag,  (no  day) No.  44. 

37th:  mu  Ha-ar-siki  ba-hul: 

itu  Ezen-'Dun-gi No.  156. 

mu  Ha-ar-sumki  ba-hul: 

(No  month) Nos.  83,  84,  112. 

40th:  mudumu-sal  lugal  pa-te-si  An-saki  ba-an-tug  :2 

(Month  broken  off) No.  140. 

(No  month) No.  142. 

mu  dumu-sal  lugal: 

(No  month) No.  141. 

41st:  mu  a-du  II-kam  Gan-harki  ba-hul: 

itu  dNe-[su ] No.  115. 

itu  Ezen-An-na No.  34. 

(No  month) Nos.  301,  100  : 8,  49. 

44th:  mu  An-sa-anki  ba-hul: 

(No  month) Nos.  100  : 71,  83. 

itu  Se-sag3-kud Nos.  100  : 79. 

itu  Se-kin-kud Nos.  100  : 55,  56. 

45th:  muus-sa  An-sa-anki  ba-hul: 

(No  month) Nos.  100:  17,  72. 

46  th : m u dN annar  Kar-zi  (d)  -da : ' 

a-du  II-kam-ma-su :5 
e-an-na  ba-an-tu(r)  :8 

itu  Se-kin-kud * No.  14  (VII). 

47  th:  mubdd-ma-da 1 ba-ru:8 

(No  month) Nos.  64,  101:  19. 

1 This  date  formula  must  denote  the  same  year  as  the  formula  mu  Si-mu-ru-urnr1  a-du  II-kam-ma-al  ba-foul 
(see  next  chapter)  and  must  have  been  used  until  Simurum  was  captured  the  second  time. 

2 Note  in  these  cases  the  variation  ba-an-tug  instead  of  the  usual  ba-tug. 

3 Note  the  sign  SAG  instead  of  the  usual  KIN. 

4 Note  omission  of  Ki. 

5 Note  variation  of  sw  for  as. 

6 Note  variation  for  e-a  ba-tu(r). 

7 Ki  wanting. 

8 Cf.  T.  T„  16414,  IV,  9. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR.  23 

53d : mu  en  dInnanna  unu{g)ki  mds-e  ni-pa(d ) : 

itu  Gdn-gan No.  22  (X). 

itu  As-a,  ud  III No.  56. 

Dates  from  the  reign  of  Bur-Sin.1 

1st:  mu  Bur-dSin  lugal-am: 

(No  month) No.  55. 

2d : mu  dBur-dSin-ge  Ur-bi-lumki  mu-hul-a: 

itu  Azag-sim,2 3 4  ud  IX No.  15  (VIII). 

3d:  muus-sa  Ur-bil-l[umki ] ba-h[ul\: 

itu  Ne-\suf No.  35. 

mugu-za  dEn-lil-ld  ba-dim: 

(No  month) No.  36. 

mu  gishgu-zai  ba-dim: 

(Month  broken  off) No.  124. 

5th:  muen  am-gal  An-na  en  dInnanna  ba-tug-ga  :5 

itu  Ab-e No.  41. 

(No  month) No.  95. 

mu  en  unu(g)-gal  dInnanna  ba  tug-ga: 

itu  As,  ud  XI No.  11. 

muen  unu (g) -gal  dInnanna  ba-tiig: 

itu  Gan-gan,  ud  II No.  47. 

mu  en  har-gal  [ ]: 

itu  Bdr-zag-gar-[ra] No.  18. 

6th:  muus-sa  en  am-gal  An-na  en  dInnanna  ba-tiig: 

itu  A[zag( ?).  . .] No.  42. 

7 th:  mu  Hu-hu~nu-rik’6  ba-hul-a: 

itu  Bdr-zag,  ud  XX V No.  4. 

itu  As-a,  ud  XIV No.  8. 

1 From  the  important  chronological  tablet  published  by  Prof.  Hilprecht,  B.  E.,  Series  A,  Vol.  XX,  No.  47,  li.  3; 
also  p.  46,  we  know  definitely  that  Bur-Sin  ruled  nine  years.  Tablets  dated  in  every  year  of  his  reign  except  4th  and 
6th  occur  in  this  volume. 

2Cf.  Nos.  1.5  : 17;  42  :8;48  : 7. 

3 Or  Bil-bil-gar-ra . 

4 mati  wanting. 

5 See  next  chapter  VI  and  IX. 

6 Written  fiu. 


24 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


8th:  muen  Eriduki  ba-tug: 

(Month  broken  off) No.  3. 

itu  Su-sa-es N o . 46 . 


9th: 


mu  us-sa  en  Eriduki  ba-tug: 

itu  dN  e-sit 

itu  Ezen-dN in-a-zu 

it  u K i-k  in-dN  in-a-zu 

itu  Ezen-d  Dun-gi 

(No  month) 

mu  us-sa  en  dEn-ki  Eriduki  ba-tug :x 

itu  dN e-sit 

muen  dNanna  Kar-zi(d)-da  ba-tug: 
itu  Su-kul-a 


. . . No.  54  (XV) . 

No.  32. 

No.  45. 

Nos.  104,  157. 
. . .Nos.  59,  103. 

No.  134  (XXV). 

No.  60. 


Dates  from  the  reign  of  Gimil-Sin. 

As  for  the  chronological  arrangement  of  the  dates,  see  following  chapter  on 
reconstruction  of  the  dates  of  this  dynasty. 

1st:  mu dG imil-dS in  lugal : 

itu  Su-kul,  ud  XXIII No.  62. 

itu  Ab-e No.  63. 

2d:  m[u  md-dara]-zu-ab  ba-ab-ba-du  (Note  form  of  date): 

itu  Se-kin-kud No.  158. 

3d:  mu  Si-ma-num?  ba-hul: 

it u A zag-s i m3 No.  48. 

4th : mu  bad  mar-tit  mik-rit: 

itu  A-ki-ti No.  116. 

5th:  mu  us-sa  dGimil-d Sin  lugal-e  bad  mar -t  it  mu-ri-ik  Ti-id-ni-im  mu-[ru]: 

itu  Sig No.  49. 

mu  us-sa  bad  mar-tu  ba-ru : 

itu  Se-kin-kud No.  1 (I). 

1 New  variation  of  date. 

2 Written  with  sign  LUM,  cf.  E.  B.  II.,  p.  276.  That  the  name  is  to  he  read  Si-ma-num  not  Si-ma-lum  is  evident 
from  /?.  T.  XIX,  p.  57,  No.  210,  where  it  is  written  Si-ma-nu-um.  Hence  the  sign  LUM  must  also  have  the  phonetic 
value  of  NUM,  known  already  from  the  door-sockets  of  Sargon  and  Naram-Sin  of  Nippur  (Hilprecht,  B.  E , Series  A, 
Vol.  I,  Part  1,  No.  1 : 4;  2 : 3,  and  Jensen  in  Schrader’s  K.  B.}  Vol.  Ill,  Part  1,  p.  116,  note  5);  cf.  No.  15  : 1.  Note 
also  even  here  the  omission  of  Ki  after  the  name.  Cf.  E.  B.  II .,  p.  276,  S.  A.  K.  /.,  p.  234. 

3 New  name  of  month.  See  Chapter  VII. 

4 To  be  noted  is  the  use  of  mu  as  prefix  of  the  verb.  Otherwise  mu  is  used  when  the  active  agent  is  given,  and 
ba  is  prefix  when  not  given.  Cf.  the  form  of  date  of  5th  year. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


25 


6th:  mu  dGimil-dSin  lugal  Uru-unu(gY-ma-ge  na?-ru-a-mah  dEn-lil  dNin-lil-ra 
mu-ne-du: 

itu  Dir-Se-kin-kud No.  2 (II). 

7th:  mu  dGimil-dSin  lugal  Uru-unu (g) ki-ma  ma-da  Za-ab-sa-liki  mu-lml: 

itu  B[ar]-zag No.  117. 

itu  Gu(d)-si No.  117. 

itu  Sig Nos.  13,  49,  88. 

itu  Su-kul,  ud  XXX No.  21. 

(No  clay) Nos.  75  (XVII),  117. 

itu  B d-b il-gar-ra No . 1 26 . 

itu  Dul-azag Nos.  85,  128. 

itu  Engar-du-a,  ud  VII No.  37. 

(No  day) ' No.  25. 

itu  Gdn-gdn-e No.  129. 

itu  As No.  117. 

itu  S e-kin-kud Nos.  117,  153. 

(Month  broken  off) Nos.  90  (XX),  145. 

(No  month) No.  152. 

8th3 : mu  dGimil-dSin  lugal  Uru-unu (g) k '-ma-ge  md-gur-mah  dEn-lil  dNin-lil-ra 
mu-dim: 


it  u S ig 

itu  Ezen-Me-ki-gal  / 
itu  S> e-kin-kud  ) 
mu  ma-g  ur-mah  ba-d in  i : 

itu  Gu{d)-si-zu 

itu  As-a 

itu  Azag-sim 

Gimil-Sin  in  seal 


No.  13  (VI). 
No.  93. 


No.  130. 
No.  131. 
. .No.  9. 
.No.  65. 


Dates  from  the  reign  of  Ibl-Sin.4 

1st:  mudI-bi-dSin  lugal: 

itu  Bar-zag-g[ar-ra ] No.  51. 

1 Ki  omitted. 

2 Must  be  na,  but  looks  like  ki.  Note  form  na-ru-a  instead  of  usual  na.  Cf.  next  chapter. 

3 See  next  chapter. 

4 Of  the  twenty-five  years  of  the  reign  of  Ibf-Sin,  according  to  the  Hilprecht  chronological  tablet,  B.  E.,  XX, 
Part  1,  No.  47;  also  p.  46,  only  two  tablets  are  to  be  found  in  this  volume,  and  one  of  them  cannot  yet  be  identified 
with  a certain  year. 

4 


26  SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 

No.  16  (IX). 
.Nos.  82,  94. 


itu  Gu(cl)-si-zu. . . 
itu  Ezen-dNin-zul 2 


Uncertain  Dates. 

From  the  reign  of  Ibi-Sin. 

mu  dI-bi-dSin  lugal  Si-mu-ru-umki  ba-hul: 

itu  Kin-  dInnanna No.  39. 


Unclassified  Dates. 

1.  mu  bad-gal  Nibruki  Uru-unu{g)ki-ma  ba-ni: 

[itu  G]u(d)-si-zu No.  133. 

2.  muus-sa  bad-gal  Nibruki  Urii-unu(g)ki-ma  ba-ru: 

[itu  S]u-kul-a No.  133. 

3 . mu  m[d ( ?) ]-da  z[u (?) ] n[e(?) ] : 

itu  Gu(d)-si-zu No.  50. 

4.  mu  Tu-ki-in-P A-mi-ig-ri-sa  dumu-sal  lu[gal  pa-te-si  Za-ab-sa-liki  ba-an-tug: 

itu  Gdn-gdn-e No.  135. 


) ba-hu[l-]a. 
z]u  [ . . 


1.  [ 

2-  [ 

3.  mu  [...... 

[ . • _ 

itu  Se-kin-kud,  ud  IX 

4-  [ • g]al  [ . . 

itu  Se-kin-kud,  ud  I 

5.  m[u ] d[  . 

itu[ ] 

6.  m[u ] e[n  . 

itu  Pap  +e(?)[ ]: 


Fragmentary  Dates. 

Originally  complete  dates. 

] ba-hul 


]■ 


Dated  month  and  day  only. 

itu  Bil-bil,  ud  XVI 

itu  Su-es-k[ul]( ?)  m[u](?),  ud  XV 


.No.  19. 
.No.  26. 
.No.  27. 

.No.  28. 

.No.  31. 

No.  137. 

No.  143. 

No.  163. 
No.  53. 


1 Note  omission  of  a. 

2 Cf.  T.  7'.,  p.  31.  Perhaps  Dim-[ku]l 


FROMjTHE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR.  27 

itu  Ab-e,  ud  XVIII No.  52. 

itu  A[s-a\ No.  87. 

itu  Se-kin-kud,  ud  XV No.  159. 

New  Variations  of  Dates. 

1.  mu  us-sa  en  dEn-ki  Eriduki  ba-tiig:1 

itu  Ne-sii No.  134. 

New  Dates. 

1.  mu  bad-gal  Nibruki  Uru-unu(g)ki-ma  ba-rit2 No.  133. 

2.  mu  us-sa  bad-gal  Nibruki  Uru-unu(g)ki-ma  ba-ru3 No.  133. 


1 Bur-Sin,  9th  year. 

2 Unclassified  dates,  No.  1. 

3 Unclassified  dates,  No.  2. 


VI. 


RECONSTRUCTION  OF  THE  DATES  OF  THE  SECOND 

DYNASTY  OF  UR, 


The  dates  of  the  kings  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur,  especially  those  of  king 
Dungi  and  his  followers,  Bur-Sin  and  Gimil-Sin,  have  been  more  or  less  completely 
arranged  chronologically  by  Radau1  and  Thureau-Dangin.2  Both  scholars  encoun- 
tered the  difficulty,  and  in  fact  the  impossibility,  of  a definite  classification  of  these 
dates,  owing  partly  to  the  gaps  in  the  date  lists,  published  long  ago  by  Hilprecht,3 
on  which  they  principally  founded  the  order  of  arrangement,  and  partly  to  the  fact 
that  the  exact  number  of  years  the  different  kings  ruled  was  yet  unknown. 

Recent  material,  and  especially  the  new  chronological  list  published  by  Hil- 
precht,4 will  now  enable  us  to  reconstruct  the  dates  of  the  kings  of  the  second  dynasty 
of  Ur  with  more  certainty.  That  a reconstruction  of  these  dates  according  to  the  very 
latest  chronological  material  at  hand,  such  as  I have  undertaken,  is  not  only  justified 
but  also  necessary,  can  be  gathered  from  the  fact  that  scholars  so  far  practically 
have  overlooked  the  important  bearing  on  the  dates  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur, 
and  especially  on  the  dates  of  Dungi,  which  this  new  Hilprecht  chronological  list 
really  has.  Thus  Thureau-Dangin  makes  no  correction  of  the  date  lists  in  the 
German  edition  of  his  Lcs  Inscriptions  cle  Sumer  et  cV Akkad,  although  it  was  pub- 
lished in  the  year  after  the  Hilprecht  tablet  was  published.  Pinches,  in  his  Amherst 
Tablets,  published  in  1908,  even  reproduces  a part  of  the  new  Hilprecht  list,5  at  the 
same  time  reproducing,  translating  and  elucidating  the  date  lists  previously  pub- 
lished by  Hilprecht  and  Radau;  but  as  for  the  identification  of  the  years  he  still 
refers  to  Radau,  who,  of  course,  would  be  the  first  to  disavow  his  former  conclusions 
in  face  of  all  the  new  material  published  since. 

1 E.  B.  H.,  pp.  252-287  (1900). 

2 Les  Inscriptions  de  Sumer  et  d’ Akkad  (1905),  pp.  329ft'.,  and  the  German  edition  of  the  same  work,  to  which 
I refer  in  this  volume,  S.  A.  K.  I.  (1907),  pp.  228-236. 

1 B.  E.,  I2,  125,  127. 

4 B.  E.,  XX1,  47,  also  p.  46. 

5 Arnh.,  pp.  xiiiff. 


[28] 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


29 


Pelagaud  in  his  Sd-tilla  texts1  still  follows  the  figures  given  by  Thureau-Dangin, 
by  giving  two  dates  of  Dungi  as  the  30th  and  46th  year,  though  they  should  now  be 
made  the  43d  and  58th  respectively.  Even  Eduard  Mayer2  follows  Thureau-Dangin, 
although  he  remarks  that  the  figures  of  the  dates  of  Dungi  ought  to  be  raised  by  12. 
Barton  in  his  latest  volume  of  IJr  tablets  (1909)  likewise  follows  Thureau-Dangin. 

In  regard  to  King  Ur-Engur,  the  founder  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur,  we  now 
know  from  the  new  Hilprecht  chronological  list  that  he  ruled  eighteen  years.  Of 
the  date  formulas  of  this  king,  however,  we  know  for  certain  only  one:  mu  Ur- 
dEngur  lugal-e  sig-ta  igi-nim-su  gir  si-ne-sd-a.  The  formulas  for  the  first  and  second 
years  of  his  reign  we  may  perhaps,  with  more  or  less  hesitation,  restore  in  accordance 
with  the  formulas  used  by  the  following  kings  of  the  dynasty.  The  dates  mu  Ur- 
Ab-ba  pa-te-si  and  mu  en  dInnanna  Unu{g)ki-a  dumu  Ur-dEngur  lugal-a  mas-e  ba- 
pa(d)-da,  given  by  Thureau-Dangin3  as  belonging  to  the  reign  of  Ur-Engur,  may 
be  the  date  formulas  of  the  patesi  Ur-Abba  of  Lagas,  just  as  well  as  the  date  Gu-de-a 
pa-te-si,  etc.,4  is  given  by  the  same  author  as  the  date  formula  of  Gudea.  The  same 
may  be  the  case  with  the  fourth  date  given  by  Thureau-Dangin.5  What  we  know, 
however,  is  that  Ur-Ab-ba  was  patesi  of  Lagas?  and  that  he  was  a contemporary 
of  Ur-Engur.1 

The  dates  of  Dungi,  the  second  king  of  the  dynasty,  are  those  most  affected  by 
the  new  Hilprecht  chronological  list.  Working  on  the  basis  of  the  material  published 
or  at  hand  at  the  time,  Radau  and  Thureau-Dangin  succeeded  in  establishing  chro- 
nological order  in  the  dates  of  Dungi,  as  far  as  the  latter  part  of  his  reign  is  concerned, 
Thureau-Dangin,  of  course,  having  the  advantage  of  more  recent  material. 

As  far  as  the  last  45  years  of  Dungi  are  concerned,  Radau  and  Thureau-Dangin 
have  presented  identical  lists,  not  to  mention  differences  in  transcriptions  and 
interpretations  of  the  date  formulas.  The  order  of  the  last  45  (according  to  Thureau- 
Dangin  46)  years  is  thus  established  with  considerable  certainty;  but  in  regard  to  the 
identification  of  the  date  formulas  with  the  respective  years,  the  whole  list  was 
hanging  in  the  air.  That  the  chronological  numbers  given  by  Thureau-Dangin 
to  these  dates  neither  can  nor  were  meant  to  represent  the  exact  year  is  seen  from 
the  fact  that  he,  in  spite  of  the  gap  after  the  first  year,  begins  anew  with  No.  1. 

1 Babyloniaca,  III  (1909),  p.  82. 

2 Geschichte  des  Altertums,  I2,  p.  341. 

3 S.  A.  K.  /.,  p.  228. 

4 R.  T.  C„  200,  R.  II,  8. 

6 Ibid. 

* See  seal  R.  T.  C.,  287 ; S.  A.  K.  /.,  pp.  148,  149. 

7 R.  T.  C.,  261,  R.  II,  12. 


30 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


The  whole  list,  thus  far  constructed,  can  now  be  nailed  down  to  its  proper  place, 
and  every  date  formula  can  be  exactly  identified  with  the  year  which  it  represents. 
Thus  we  know  from  the  new  Hilprecht  chronological  list1  that  Dungi  ruled  58 
years.  We  also  know  that  the  last  date  formula  of  the  reign  of  Dungi  was  mu  us-sa 
Ha-ar-siki  Ki-maski  u Hu-mur-tiki  ba-hid,  which  would  denote  the  same  year  as 
that  which  in  its  later  months  have  the  date  formula  of  the  new  king,  or  mu 
dBur-dSin  lugal,  both  dates  occurring  during  the  patesiship  of  Ur-Samas.2 

The  last  full  year  of  Dungi  would  then  have  the  formula  mu  Ha-ar-siki  Hu- 
mur-tiki  u Ki-maski  ba-hul,  or  the  last  date  of  the  established  list.  Hence  that  for- 
mula would  represent  the  58th  year  of  Dungi.  Now  by  simply  counting  backward 
from  this  date  we  can  establish  the  order  of  the  known  and  certain  dates  of  the 
last  46  full  years  of  Dungi.3 

As  for  King  Bur-Sin,  the  third  ruler  of  this  dynasty,  we  know  from  the  same 
source  that  he  ruled  nine  years.  If  the  translation  of  a date  given  by  Lau  from 
an  unpublished  tablet  is  correct,4  we  have  ten  elate  formulas  from  the  reign  of  Bur- 
Sin,  the  last  formula,  mu  us-sa  endNanna  Kar-zi(d)-da  ba-tug,  denoting  his  last  year, 
which  is  the  same  as  the  accession  year  of  Gimil-Sin,  while  the  preceding  date 
formula,  mu  en  dNanna  Kar-ziid) -da  ba-tug,  would  represent  the  last  full  year  of  the 
reign  of  Bur-Sin.  Thus  we  have  a complete  list  of  the  dates  of  this  king.5 

In  regard  to  Gimil-Sin,  the  fourth  ruler  of  the  dynasty,  we  now  know 
from  the  new  chronological  list  that  he  only  ruled  seven  years.  The  perfectly 
clear  cuneiform  numbers,  as  can  be  seen  from  the  photographic  reproduction  of  the 
tablet,6  excludes  every  shadow  of  doubt.  On  account  of  certain  date  formulas, 
however,  a larger  number  of  years  have  been  assigned  to  this  ruler.7 

The  chronological  list,  published  by  Hilprecht  many  years  ago,8  gives  the  date 
formula  mu  ma-da  Za-ab-sa-liki  ba-hid,  or  the  recognized  formula  for  the  7th  year, 
as  the  last.  The  supposition  that  this  is  the  formula  for  the  7th  year  is  strengthened 
by  the  fact  that  the  preceding  date  formula,  mu  na-mah  dEn-ld-ld  ba-ru,  is  in  its 
turn  preceded  by  an  us-sa-bi  year  of  mu  bad  mar-tu  ba-ru,  denoting  the  4th  year. 
From  the  breaks  of  the  tablet  it  would  seem  as  if  the  date  formula  originally  had 

1 B.  E.,  XX1,  47 ; also  p.  46. 

2 See  dates. 

3 See  dates. 

*0.  B.  T.  R.,  No.  168,  p.  68. 

5 See  dates. 

6 B.  E.,  XX1,  Phototype  illustrations , PI.  XV,  No.  17,  Rev. 

7 Radau,  E.  B.  II.,  pp.  275-277;  Thureau-Dangin,  S.  A.  K.  /.,  p.  234. 

*B.  E„  I2,  127,  R. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


31 


been  mu  bad  mar-tu  ba-ru  us-sa-bi.1  In  any  case  this  date  formula  cannot  cor- 
respond to  the  following.  Hence  the  two  formulas  must  represent  two  different 
years  or  the  5th  and  6th  respectively. 

But  if  the  Za-ab-sa-li  ki  formula  is  the  7th  and  last  on  the  tablet,  as  is  clearly 
shown  by  the  uninscribed  place  below,  it  is  not  the  last  of  the  reign  of  Gimil-Sin. 
It  is  most  likely  that  the  very  tablets  were  made  in  this  year  of  Gimil-Sin,  and  thus 
naturally  the  following  date  formulas  could  not  be  given.  We  know  two  more 
date  formulas  from  the  reign  of  Gimil-Sin,  for  which  there  is  no  place  except  after 
the  7th  year.2  Thus  in  fact  we  have  date  formulas  for  9 years  of  Gimil-Sin,  although 
this  king,  according  to  the  new  Hilprecht  chronological  tablet,  ruled  only  7 years. 

There  is,  however,  a very  plausible  explanation  of  this  apparent  discrepancy 
between  the  chronological  list  and  the  date  formulas  at  hand.  The  chronicler  only 
counted  the  full  years  of  the  king’s  rule,  while  date  formulas  also  for  his  first  and 
last  year,  of  which  only  a few  months  came  within  his  rule,  are  to  be  found.  His 
1st  year  date  formula  would  then  designate  the  part  of  this  year  in  which  he  ruled,3 
the  2d  year  formula  the  1st  full  year,  the  8th  formula  would  designate  the  7th  full 
year  and  the  9th  the  first  part  of  the  year  in  which  he  died,  which  year  would  be  the 
same  as  the  1st  year  of  his  successor.  Thus  the  seven  years  assigned  to  Gimil-Sin 
by  the  chronicler  is  a round  number,  only  the  full  years  being  counted.  As  far 
as  we  know,  he  ruled  at  least  eight  years  and  three  months  in  all.  This  tends  to 
show  that  instead  of  the  Babylonian  chroniclers  being  apt  to  raise  the  length  of 
the  rules  of  their  kings  by  giving  round  numbers,4  they  were  more  apt  to  lower  the 
total  sum  of  the  rule  of  a dynasty  by  only  giving  the  number  of  full  years. 

An  interesting  case  tablet  bearing  on  the  subject  of  the  relation  between  the 
decession  of  Bur-Sin  and  the  accession  of  Gimil-Sin  has  been  published  by  Pinches.5 
The  tablet  itself  bears  the  date: 

itu  dDumu-zi 
mu  Gimil-dSin  lugal; 

the  case  or  envelope  on  the  other  hand : 
itu  Ezen-dBa-u 

mu  en  dNanna  Kar-zi{d ) ba-tiig. 

1 Cf.  the  date  formula  of  the  14th  year  of  Dungi. 

2 See  dates  of  Gimil-Sin. 

3 We  know  that  Gimil-Sin  had  ascended  the  throne  already  in  the  month  Ne-su  or  4th  month,  C.  T.,  Ill,  16371,  7. 

4 Thus  we  have  one  tablet  dated  in  the  4th  month  of  his  1st  year,  C.  T.,  Ill,  16371,  7,  and  another  dated  in  the 
6th  month  of  his  9th  year,  R.  T . C 429,  R.,  2. 

5 Amh.,  p.  xviii. 


32 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


Thus  the  tablet  is  dated  in  the  7th  month  of  the  accession  year  of  Gimil-Sin ; 
but  the  envelope,  as  the  text  actually  is  transcribed  by  Pinches,  is  dated  in  the 
9th  month  of  the  9th  year  of  Bur-Sin,  that  is  ten  months  earlier,  as  we  know,  if 
Lau1  gives  an  authentic  translation,  that  the  last  or  tenth  year  of  Bur-Sin  had 
the  formula  mu-us-sa  en  Kar-zi{d)-da .2  Of  course,  the  date  on  the  envelope  must 
have  been  made  after  the  tablet  was  enclosed,  hence  later.  In  any  case  there  must 
lie  some  mistake  on  the  envelope.  Perhaps  the  scribe  wrote  mu  for  mu  us-sa.  The 
explanation  offered  by  Pinches,  that  the  en  Kar-zi(d)-da  formula  must  designate 
the  2d  year  of  Gimil-Sin,  and  Iris  to  lie  taken  away  from  Bur-Sin,  cannot  be  main- 
tained. It  would  upset  the  whole  order  of  dates. 

If,  however,  the  date  of  the  envelope  really  is  meant  for  the  last  year  of  Bur- 
Sin,  i.e.,  the  mu  us-sa  en  Kar-zi(d)-da,  as  is  the  most  plausible  explanation,  this 
would  show  that  a scribe  in  principle  perhaps  would  continue  to  date  according 
to  the  formula  of  a dead  king  even  after  the  new  king  had  been  established,  or 
possibly  by  ignorance  of  the  change,  or  by  mistake  pure  and  simple,  just  as  we  in 
the  beginning  of  a new  year  are  apt  to  forget  and  continue  to  write  the  old  accus- 
tomed year. 

It  will  lie  noted  that  I have  identified  the  formulas  for  the  last  year  of  Bur- 
Sin  and  the  mu  lugal  of  the  first  year  of  Gimil-Sin,  as  well  as  the  last  year  of  Gimil- 
Sin  and  the  first  year  of  Ibi-Sin,  as  denoting  the  same  year  respectively.  This, 
to  be  sure,  in  spite  of  Kugler’s  very  positive  statement  to  the  contrary.3  The  only 
proof  that  Kugler  advances  for  his  dogmatic  statement  is  the  fact  that  the  same 
years  are  designated  by  two  date  formulas.  To  my  mind,  and  as  long  as  no  stronger 
proofs  are  presented,  this  fact  proves  the  very  opposite  of  what  Kugler’s  11  These" 
asserts. 

Thus  it  is  certain  that  a year,  beginning  at  the  New  Year,  was  designated  by 
a mu  us-sa  formula  of  the  date  formula  for  the  preceding  year,  until  some  event 
took  place,  which  would  make  the  occasion  for  the  giving  out  of  a new  date  formula. 
As  far  as  the  kings  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur  are  concerned,  the  last  year  of  three 
of  them  is  designated  by  a mu  us-sa  formula.4  Naturally  this  formula  would  be 
used  in  the  beginning  of  the  year,  which  also,  as  of  course  could  not  be  foreseen, 
proved  to  be  the  last  year  of  the  king.  The  accession  of  the  new  king  would 

1 0.  B.  T.  R.,  No.  168,  p.  68. 

2 That  the  mu  en  Kar-zi(d)-da  does  not  designate  the  last  year  of  Gimil-Sin  is  seen  from  the  dating  in  this  year 
even  up  to  the  month  Dir-Se-kin-kud,  Amh.,  118,  6. 

3 Z.  A.,  XXII,  p.  65,  i.e.:  “These  1.  mu  X lugal(-e)  bezeichnet  durchaus  nichl  das  Antritts-J ahr  (accession  year) 
des  Konigs,  sondern  sein  erstes  voiles  Jahr." 

4 Dungi,  Bur-Sin  and  Gimil-Sin;  see  dates. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


33 


certainly  be  such  an  important  event  as  to  make  it  the  occasion  for  the  issue  of  a 
new  date  formula,  which,  according  to  ordinary  usage,  would  serve  as  date  formula 
for  the  rest  of  the  year. 

This  view  of  the  matter  also  explains  satisfactorily  the  nine  date  formulas 
of  Gimil-Sin,  while  according  to  the  new  Hilprecht  tablet  he  ruled  only  seven  (full) 
years.  As  long  as  Kugler  does  not  give  more  convincing  proofs  for  his  “These,” 
it  would  also  in  this  respect  be  safer  to  rely  on  the  statement  of  the  Babylonian 
chronicler. 

In  regard  to  Ibi-Sin,  the  fifth  and  last  king  of  the  dynasty,  the  new  list 
has  assigned  twenty-five  years  to  his  rule.  Of  the  date  formulas  of  this  king  we 
know  only  two,  the  formula  for  his  first  year  and  another  that  cannot  be  identified 
with  a certain  year. 


DATE  FORMULAS  OF  THE  SECOND  DYNASTY  OF  UR. 

1.  Certain  Dates. 


1st:  [mu  Ur-dEngur  lugal](?) 

2d:  [mu  us-sa  Ur-dEngur  lugal) ( ?) 


3d:  [ ] 

4th:  [ ] 

5th:  [ ] 

6th:  [ ] 

7th:  [ ] 

8th:  [ ] 

9th:  [ ] 

10th:  [ ] 

11th:  [ ] 

12th:  [ ] 

13th:  [ ] 

14th:  [ ] 

15th:  [ ] 

16th:  [ ] 

17th:  [ ] 

18th:  [ ] 


1 R.  T.  C.,  261,  R.,  II,  14;  262,  R.,  II,  2;  263,  R. 

2 R.  T.  C.,  264,  R,,  II,  5. 

3 1?.  T.  C.}  264,  R.,  II,  2. 

4 R.  T.  C.,  265,  R.,  Ill,  7. 


Certain  : 

mu  Ur-Engur  lugal-e  sig-ta  igi-nim- 
su  gir  si-ne-sd-ax 

Uncertain: 
mu  Ur-Ab-ba  pa-te-si1  2 3 
mu  endInnanna  Unu(g)ki-a  dumu  Ur- 
dEngur  lugal-a  mas-e  ba-pa(d) -d<T 
[mu  e]  d Nin-sun-[na( ?)]  ba-ru-a 4 


Ur-Engur. 


4. 


34 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


Dungi. 


1st: 

2d: 

3d: 

4th: 

5th: 

6 th: 

7 th: 
8th : 
9 th: 

10th: 

11th: 

12th: 

13th: 

14th: 

15th: 


mu  Dun-gi  lugal 1 

[mu  us-sa  Dun-gi  lugal]( ?)2 3 

[ 

[ 

[ 

[ 

[ 

[ 

[ 

[ 

[ 

[ 


(a)  mu  dDun-gi-ra  d-su(m)-ma? 

( b ) mu  lugal-ra  a [ . . . ] su(m)-ma4 

( c ) mu  en-nam-X  d Dun-gi-ra-ge  ba-gub 
ha-tug 5 


mu  us  e-dN in-IB  ki-ba-a-gar 6 
mu  us  e-dNin-IB  us-sa 7 

mu  gvr  Nibruki[ ]8 

mu  lugal-e  Uru-unu(g)ki-ta  Nibruki 


su-in-nigin 9 


16th:  mu  mci  d N in-lil-la  ba-du 10 
1 7 th : mu  ma  d N in-lit-ld-ge  us-sa 11 

mu  dNanna  Kar-zi(d)-da  e-a  ba-tu(r)12 


1 R.  T.  C„  273,  R.,  5. 

2 Restored  by  analogy  and  in  accordance  with  the  date  formula  for  the  second  year  of  Bur-Sin,  C.  T.,  VII, 
19775,  II,  17;  X,  19064,  R.,  20.  Radau,  E.  B.  II.,  p.  254,  has  suggested  mu  e-SID. LAM  ba-mi  as  a date  formula  that 
perhaps  would  come  into  this  gap.  Another  hypothetical  date  formula  could  for  good  reasons  be  suggested  from  the 
new  chronicle  published  by  King,  Chronicles  Concerning  Early  Babylonian  Kings,  Vol.  II,  p.  11,  117,  where  it  is  stated 
(Reverse,  lines  5-7)  that  Dungi  plundered  the  treasures  of  Esagila  and  Babylon.  This  must  certainly  have  been  an 
event  of  great  notoriety  and  consequence.  Hence  it  is  in  the  highest  degree  probable  that  Dungi  would  date  a year 
after  such  an  event.  The  formula  would,  of  course,  be  something  like  mu  Ka-dingir-rakl  ba-Jiul. 

3 On  a tablet  in  the  possession  of  Mr.  Noorian,  New  York  (see  Radau,  E.  B.  H .,  p.  254).  Barton  gives  a date  mu 
temen  E-nunkl  as  a date  of  Dungi,  but  on  what  authority  he  does  not  state.  The  reading,  however,  is  very  doubtful. 
See  II.  L.  C.,  II,  PI.  81,  No.  36. 

4 if.  T.  C.,  268,  R„  8. 

5 E.  A.  II.,  109,  R„  7;  B.  E.  II.,  pp.  280,  420 

6 if.  T.  C.,  274,  R.,  5. 

7 R.  T.  C.,  275,  R„  3. 

8 B.  E„  I2,  125,  R„  2. 

9 B.  E.,  I2,  125,  0.,  3;  if.  T.  C„  277,  R„  1. 

10  B.  E.,  I2,  125,  0.,  4. 

11  if.  T.  C„  282,  R„  4;  283,  R„  3. 

12  B.  E„  I2,  125,  0.,  5, 


Prom  the  temple  archives  of  nippur. 


35 


18th:  mu  E-har-sag  lugal  ba-du 1 
mu  E-har-sag  ba-du? 
mu  E-har-sag 3 

19th:  mu  dKA.DI  bad-gal-ANki  e-a  ba-tu(r)i 

20th:  mudNu-TTJG 5 -mus-da  Ka-zal-luki  e-a  ba-tu(r)e 

21st:  mu  E-hal-bi  lugal  ba-du1 

22d:  mu  dNanna  Nibruki  e-a  ba-tu(r)8 

23d:  mu  en-ner-zi  An-na  en  dNanna  mds-e  ni-pa(d) 9 

24th:  mu  gish?ia(d)10  d Nin-lil-ld11 

mu  na(d)  dNin-li[l]-l[d]  b[a]-d[im]12 
mu  gishna{d)  dNin-lil-ld  us-sa 13 
25th:  mu  gishna(d)  us-sau 

mu  en-ner-zi  An-na  en  dNanna  ba-tug-ga 15 
26th:  mu  N i-alim-mi-da-su  dumu-salie  lugal  nam-nim  Mar-ha-si-ki  ba-il 17 
27th:  mu  UBARAkilB  ki-bi  ba-ab-gi 19 

28th:  mu  dumu  Uru-unu (g)  ki-ma  galu-gis-gid-su  ka-ba-ab-kes 20 
29th:  mu  dN in-IB  pa-te-si-gal  d En-lil-ld-ge21 
30th:  [mu  d]En-lil-ld  d Nin-lil-ld-ge 22 

31st:  mu  [ ] ba-du{g)-ga  [ ]23 

1 B.  E.,  I2,  125,  o„  6. 

2R.  T.  C.,  284,  R„  6. 

3 R.  T.  C.,  285,  R„  4. 

4 B.  E„  I2,  125,  0.,  7. 

5 Left  out  in  Randolph  Berens’  tablets,  Amh.,  p.  xiv. 

6 B.  E.,  I2,  125,  0.,  8. 

7 B.  E„  I2,  125,  0.,  9. 

8 B.  E.t  I2,  125,  O.,  10. 

9 B.  E„  I2,  125,  0.,  11;  E.  A.  H„  40;  E.  B.  H„  p.  256. 

10  Radau  reads  alam,  E.  B.  H.,  p.  257,  still  followed  by  Pinches,  Amh.,  p.  29;  but  the  sign  is  no  doubt  na(d). 

11  T.  T„  256,  8. 

12  B.  E„  I2,  125,  O.,  12. 

13  T.  T , 257,  R.,  2. 

14  Amh.,  16,  12. 

15  B.  E„  I2,  125,  0.,  13. 

16  This  sign,  on  which  every  scholar  has  stumbled,  is  most  likely  alim.,  Br.  8882;  R.  E.  C.,  22S.  Cf.  Sign  List. 

17  B.  E„  I2,  125,  0.,  14. 

1S  Radau  reads  bad,  E.  B.  Ii .,  p.  258,  but  it  is  no  doubt  Br.  4394. 

19  B.  E„  I2,  125,  0.,  15. 

20  B.  E„  I2,  125,  0.,  16. 

21  B.  E„  I2,  125,  0.,  17. 

22  B.  E„  I2,  125,  O.,  18. 

23  B.  E„  I2,  125,  0.,  19. 


36 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


3 2d : mu  us  [ ]l 

33d : mu  lugal  [ ]2 

34  th:  mu  Gan-harkii  La-hut 
35th:  mu  us  -sa  Gan-harki  ba-hul 5 
mu  Si-mu-ru-umki  ba-hut 
36th:  mu  us-sa  Si-mu-ru-umki  ba-hut 

mu  S[i]-m[u]-r[u]-u[mkY  [a]-du  II-kam-ma-as  ba-hid8 
37  th:  mu  Ha-ar-siki 9 ba-hut 0 
38th:  mu  en  Eriduki-ga  ba-tug-ga11 
39th:  mu  us-sa  en  Eriduki-ga  ba-tug-ga 12 
40th:  mu  dumu-sal  lugal  pa-te-si  An-saki  ba-an-tug13 

mu  dumu-sal  lugal  pa-te-si  An-sa-ank'-ge  ba-tugu 
mu  dumu-sal  lugal1-' 

41st:  mu  Gan-harki  a-du  Jl-kam-as  ba-hut 8 
mu  a-du  II-kam-as  Gan-harki  ba-hut 7 
42dls:  mu  Si-mu-ru-umki  a-du  III-kam10-as  ba-hul20 
43d:  mu  us-sa  Si-mu-ru-umki  a-du  lll-kam-as  ba-hul 21 
mu  Gan-harki  a-du  III-kam-as  ba-hul 22 

: B.  E„  I2,  125,  R„  1. 

2 B.  E„  I2,  125,  II.,  2. 

3 To  read  the  name  as  Sumerian.  If  taken  as  Semitic,  it  is,  of  course,  to  be  read  Kar-fiaiJci. 

4R.  E„  I2,  125,  R„  3;  T.  T 27. 

5 Amh.,  17,  IV,  6. 

6 B.  E.,  I2,  125,  R.,  4;  Amh.,  18,  R.,  5;  also  Dates  of  Dungi,  preceding  chapter. 

7 C.  T .,  X,  14348,  E.,  11;  also  Dates  of  Dungi,  preceding  chapter. 

* B.  E.,  I2,  125,  R.,  5. 

a Amh.,  22,  7,  has  A-ar-st1,  and  a fragment  of  the  envelope  has  Ar-si.  Note  also  the  variation  Sum,  Dates  of 
Dungi,  preceding  chapter. 

10  B.  E.,  I2,  125,  R.,  6;  also  reference  in  preceding  note. 

11  B.  E.,  I2,  125,  R„  7. 

12  B.  E„  I2,  125,  R„  S;  T.  T.,  121. 

13  Dates  of  Dungi  (Nos.  140,  142). 

14  B.  E.,  I2,  125,  R.,  9;  Dates  of  Dungi. 

15  Dates  of  Dungi  (No.  141). 

18  B.  E.,  I2,  125,  R„  10;  Amh.,  23,  7. 

17  E.  A.  II.,  No.  96,  has  this  form,  not  the  one  given  by  Radau,  E.  B.  H.,  p.  260.  See  also  Dates  of  Dungi. 

IS  A mu  us-sa  formula  for  this  year  is  probably  to  be  found  in  II.  L.  C.,  II,  PI.  63,  No.  31,  R.,  1.  See  Unclassified 
Dates,  No.  12. 

10  R.  T.  C.,  288,  R.,  10  adds  ma. 

20  B.  E„  I2,  125,  R„  11. 

21  B.  E„  I2,  125,  R.,  12. 

22  R.  T.  C„  142,  left  edge. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


37 


44th : mu  An-sa-anki  ba-hul1 
45th : mu  us-sa  An-sa-anki  ba-hul2 
mu  us-sa  An-sa-anki3 

46th:  mu  dNanna  Kar-zi{d)-daki  a-du  II-kam-ma-su  e-an-na  ba-an-tu{rY 

47  th:  mu  bad  ma-da  ba-ru3 

48th : mu  us-sa  bad  ma-daki  ba-ru? 

49th:  mu  e-kuJ-sa-is  dDa-gan-ge  dDun-gi-ra  ba-ru 8 
mu  su-sa-is  dDa-gdn-ge  dDun-gi  ba-ru 9 
mu  e-ku-sa-is  d Da-gdn-na  ba-ru 10 
50th:  mu  us-sa  e-ku-sa-is  d Da-gdn-na  ba-ru 11 
mu  us-sa  e-ka-sa-is  d Da-gdn-na  ba-ru 12 
mu  us-sa  e-su-sa  dDa-gdn  ba-ru 13 
mu  us-sa  e-su-sa-is  Da  ba-ru 14 
mu  us-sa  e d Dun-gi-ra  ba-ru 15 
51st:  mu  us-sa  e-ku-sa-is  d Da-gdn-na  ba-ru  mu  us-sa-bi 16 
mu  us-sa  e-su-sa-is  dDa-gdn  ba-rii  mu-us-sa-bi 17 
mu  us-sa  e mu  us-sa-bi1 8 
52d:  mu  Sa-as-ruki  ba-hul 19 

1 B.  E„  I2,  125,  R„  13;  C.  T.,  X,  15322,  IV,  16;  Amh.,  24,  12;  Dates  of  Dungi. 

2 B.  E„  I2,  125,  R„  14;  E.  A.  II.,  98;  E.  B.  II.,  p.  260;  C.  T„  I,  94-10-15,  5,  R„  III,  14;  X,  17747,  IV,  21;  Dates 
of  Dungi. 

3 Amh.,  25,  9. 

4 B.  E„  l\  125,  R.,  15  (ba-tu(r)) ; Dates  of  Dungi  (14;. 

5 B.  E„  P,  125,  R.,  15;  T.  T.,  16414,  IV,  9;  Amh.,  26,  7;  27,  R.,  8;  Dates  of  Dungi. 

6 B.  E.,  I2,  125,  R.,  16  (the  only  formula  having  hi) ; R.  T.  C.,  299,  R.,  4;  E.  A.  II.,  99,  100;  E.  B.  II.,  p.  261 ; C.  7'., 

I,  94-10-15,  3;  IV,  18957,  V,  145. 

7 The  sign  occurs  in  different  forms  in  these  date  formulas  as  KA  + GAR  = ku,  KA  + <SL1  = su,  and,  if  Lau 
is  right,  only  KA.  See  0.  B.  T.  R .,  No.  252,  R.,  IV,  16.  The  signs  are  here  transcribed  as  occurring  in  the  different 
texts.  Cf.  the  numerous  proper  names  containing  this  element. 

*E.  A.  II.,  101;  E.  B.  II.,  p.  261. 

9  Amh.,  29,  11. 

10  B.  E.,  I2,  125,  R.,  18;  R.  T.  C.,  423,  R.,  3 ( dingir  before  Da-gan  wanting)  ; C.  T .,  IX,  18437,  IL,  21  ( na  wanting) ; 

X,  19067,  R.,  16  {na  wanting);  II.  L.  C.,  PI.  33,  No.  81,  VIII,  13;  0.  B.  T.  R.,  185,  5. 

11  B.  E.,  I2,  125,  R„  19;  R.  T.  C„  414,  R.,  5;  C.  T .,  VII,  13165,  R.,  16;  Amh.,  31,  IV,  13.  Barton  makes  this 
a new  date  that  he  has  not  noticed  elsewhere,  II.  L.  C.,  I,  p.  9. 

12  O.  B.  T.  R.,  252,  R„  16. 

13  C.  T.,  X,  19067,  R„  16;  21429,  R.,  14;  II.  L.  C.,  PI.  33,  No.  81,  VIII,  13. 

14  Amh.,  30,  8. 

15  R.  T.  C.,  424,  R.,  4. 

18  B.  E.,  I2,  125,  R„  20;  T.  T.,  26;  C.  T.,  V,  18358,  VI,  5 {na  wanting),  etc.;  0.  B.  T.  R.,  185;  Amh.,  32,  R„  11. 

17  C.  T„  VII,  12927,  IV,  10. 

18  C.  T .,  V,  18358,  I,  5. 

19  B.  E.,  I2,  125,  R.,  21;  C.  T.,  V,  17752;  VII,  12946;  X,  18962,  etc.;  Amh.,  35,  8 {Sa-as-ru-umki). 


38 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


53d:  mu  en  d Narnia  mds-e  ib-pa  (d) 1 
mu  en  dNanna  mds-e  ni-pa(d)2 
mu  en  dInnanna  unu(g)ki  mds-e  ni-pa{d)3 
54th:  mu  Si-mu-ur-ru-umki  Lu-lu-bu-umki  a-du  X-lal-I-kam-as  ba-hul 4 
mu  Si-mu-ur-ru-umki  Lu-lu-buki 5 

55th:  muus-sa  Si-mu-ru-umki  Lu-iu-bu-umki  a-du  X-lal-I-kam-as  ba-hul 6 

mu  dDun-gi  nita  kala{g)-ga  lugal  Uru-unu{g)ki-ma  lugal  an-ub-ba  tab-bci-ge  Ur- 
bil-lumki  Si-mu-ru-umki  Lu-lu-buki  u Gan-harki  as  es-su  sag  + slg-bi  su- 
g'l  r-ra  im-mi-ra1 
mu  Ur-bil-l\ki  ba-a-hid* 
mu  Ur-bil-lumki  ba-hul 9 
56th:  muus-sa  Ur-bil-lumki  ba-hul 10 

mu  Ki-maski  H u-mur-tiki  ba-hid11 
mu  Ki-maski  ba-hul 12 

57th:  mud Dun-gi  nita  kala{g)-ga  lugal  Uru-unu(g)ki-ma  lugal  an-ub-ba  tab-ba-ge  Ki- 
maski  Hu-mur-tiki  u ma-da-bi  ud-as  mu-hid  mu  us-sa-bi13 
mu  us-sa  Ki-maski  u Hu-mur-tiki  ba-hul 14 
58th:  mu  us-sa  Ki-maski  ba-hid  mu  us-sa-bi 15 
mu  us-sa  Ki-maski  mu  us-sa-a-bi 16 
mu  Ha-ar-siki  H,  u-mur-tiki  ba-hul 17 
mu  Ha-ar-si  bci-hid 18 

1 C.  T„  VII,  13164,  R„  5;  Amh.,  38,  IV,  28. 

2 E.  B.  //.,  p.  263;  C.  T„  I,  94-10-15,  5,  R„  III,  18;  X,  14612,  R„  VI,  29  (m  wanting). 

3 It  is  a question  whether  this  formula  denotes  the  same  year  as  the  one  above  or  the  formula  of  Dungi  23d  or 

38  th. 

4 E.  A.  //.,  1,  2,  3;  E.  B.  H„  p.  263;  R.  T.  C„  305,  R„  18  (ur  wanting);  C.  T„  V,  12231,  O.,  VII,  28  (adds  a). 

5 C.  T.,  Ill,  18957,  III,  60;  IV,  107. 

6 C.  T„  I,  96-4-10,  3,  R„  3;  V,  19024,  XII,  26;  Amh.,  40,  9. 

7 C.  T.,  V,  12231,  X,  15. 

8 Amh.,  42,  7. 

0 E.  A.  H.,  4,  5;  E.  B.  H.,  p.  264;  C.  T .,  VII,  12940,  R„  19  (adds  uni);  T.  T.,  299. 

10  C.  T.,  VII,  13138,  R„  15;  18407,  R.,  18;  T.  T.,  61. 

11  C.  T .,  Ill,  21340,  VI,  160. 

12  E.  A.  II.,  6-8;  E.  B.  II.,  p.  265;  H.  L.  C.,  PI.  16,  No.  24;  Amh.,  43,  7. 

13  C.  T„  V,  18346,  VIII,  6. 

14  E.  A.  II.,  9-17;  E.  B.  II.,  p.  263;  H.  L.  C.,  PI.  21,  Nos.  11,  13;  PI.  22,  No.  26. 

15  E.  A.  II.,  18-24 ; E.  B.  II.,  p.  265;  G.  T .,  V,  17751,  IV,  20;  II.  L.  C.,  PI.  24,  No.  29. 

16  C.  T„  17776,  R„  15;  17785,  R„  7;  X,  14344,  R„  10  (a  wanting). 

17  C.  T„  VII,  12932,  IV,  11 ; 12934,  VI,  6,  etc. 

18  C.  T.,  Ill,  21338,  VII,  162 ; Amh.,  21,  9 (p.  40). 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


39 


59th1 : mu  us-sa  Ha-ar-siki  Ki-maski  u Hu-mur-tiki  ba-hid 2 
mu  us-sa  Ki-maski  u Hu-mur-tiki  ba-hul* 

Bur-Sin.4 

1st:  mudBur-dSin  lugal-am5 
mu  dBur-dSin  lugal 6 
2d:  mu  us-sa  dBur-dSin  lugal 7 

mu  dBur-dSin  lugal-e  Ur-bil-lumki  ba8-hid 9 
mudBur-dSin  lugal  Ur-bil-lumki  mu-hid 10 
3d:  mu  us-sa  Ur-bil-lumki  ba-hul-a11 

mu  Bishgu-za-mah  dEn-lil-la  ba-dim 13 
mu  gu-za  dEn-lil-la  ba-dim 13 
4th:  mu  en  gal-mah  An-na  en  dNanna  ba-a-tug 14 
mu  en  mah-gal  An-na  en  dN anna  ba-tug 15 
mu  en  mah  An-na  en  dNanna  ba-tug 16 
mu  en  mah-gal  An-na  ba-tug 17 

5th18:  mudBur-dSin  nita  kala{g)-ga  lugal  an-ub-da  tab-ba-ge  en  unu(g)-gal  dlnnanna 
in-tug 19 

mu  en  unu{g)-gal  An-na  en  dInnanna  ba-tug 20 

1 Last  year  of  Dungi  and  accession  year  of  Bur-Sin. 

2 Given  by  Scheil,  R.  T XVII,  p.  38,  without  reference  made  to  original.  The  tablets  R.  T.  C.,  291,  292, 
referred  to  by  Thureau-Dangin , S.  A.  K.  /.,  p.  233,  has  the  formula  mud Bur-dSin  lugal. 

3 C.  T.,  X,  14308,  I,  7. 

4 See  Dates  of  Bur-Sin,  preceding  chapter. 

5 B.  E.,  I2,  127,  O.,  1. 

8 E.  A.  H.,  27-32;  E.  B.  H.,  p.  266;  R.  T.  C.,  291,  R.,  3;  292,  R.  8;  C.  T.,  VII,  12945,  IV,  4;  13140,  R.,  19;  etc.; 
Amh.,  57,  12;  58,  R.,  17,  etc. 

7 E.  A.  II.,  33,  34;  E.  B.  H.,  p.  266;  C.  T.,  VII.,  11766,  R.,  15;  1S394,  R„  15,  etc. 

8 Note  prefix  ba  with  the  name  given. 

9 B.  E.,  I2,  127,  O.,  2;  E.  A.  H„  35-54;  E.  B.  II.,  p.  266;  C.  T .,  VII,  12926,  IV,  3;  18373,  II.,  20. 

10  Amh.,  61,  R.,  11 ; 62,  R.,  8 (lugal-e). 

11  C.  T ..  VII,  18407,  R.,  18 ; Amh.,  66,  R.,  15. 

12  B.  E.,  I2,  127,  O.,  3;  E.  ,1.  II.,  68-73;  E.  B.  11.,  p.  267;  R.  T.  C.,  296,  R„  IV,  12;  Amh.,  68,  R„  6. 

13  Amh.,  69,  R.,  IV,  23. 

14  Amh.,  70,  12;  71,  10;  72,  13;  H.  L.  C.,  PI.  2,  No.  300,  R.,  3.  Barton  makes  this  an  altogether  new  date  by 
translating  the  verbal  infix  a as  meaning  “for  the  second  time,”  I,  p.  25. 

15  B.  E„  I2,  127,  0.,  4;  E.  A.  H„  68-73;  E.  B.  II.,  p.  267;  C.  T.,  VII,  12925,  IV,  5;  X,  12921,  IV,  36;  Amh.,  73,  9, 
etc.;  74,  12  (ba-tug  wanting);  78,  5 (ba-tug-a). 

I9//.  L.  C.t  PI.  51,  No.  1,  24. 

17  H.  L.  C.,  PI.  44,  No.  232,  R.,  3;  T.  T„  117,  X,  7 (ba-tug  wanting). 

18  For  a discussion  of  the  formula  for  the  5th  year  of  Bur-Sin,  see  chapter  IX. 

,9  B.  E.,  I2,  126,  R„  VII,  6.  20  C.  T„  VII,  18370,  R„  14. 


40 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


mu  en  am-gal  An-na  en  d I /marina  ba-tiuf 

mu  en  unu(g) -gal  dInnanna  ba-tug-ga 2 

mu  en-nun-gal  An-na  ki-ag  dBur-dSin  en  Eriduki  ba-tiuf 

mu  en-nun-gal  dBur-dSin  ki-ag  en  Eriduki  ab-ti/g4 

mu  en-nun-edBur-dSin-ra  ki-ag  en  Eriduki  ba-tiuf' 

mu  en-nun-ni  d Bur-d Sin-ra  ki-ag  ba-tiuf 

mu  en-nun-ni  ki-ag  dBur-dSin  Eriduk!  ba-tiuf 

mu  en  nnu(g)-gal  dInnanna  ba-tiig 8 

mu  en  unu(g)-gal  dInnanna  ba-tiuf 

mu  en  unu(g)-gal  ba-tiuf 0 

mu  en  har-gal  d I /manna  ba-tiuf1 

mu  en  har-gal  [ ]12 

6th13:  mu  us-sa  en  am-gal  An-na  en  d I /manna  ba-a-tiig 14 
mu  us-sa  en  An-na  en  Innanna  ba-tiuf r> 
mu  us-sa  en  am-gal  An-na  ba-tiig16 
mu  dBur-dSin  lugal-e  Sa-as-ru-umki  ba-hul 17 
mu  Sa-as-ruki  ba-hul 18 
7 th:  mu  us-sa  Sa-as-ru-umki  ba-hul 19 
mu  Hu-hii-nu-riki20  ba-hiil-a21 
mu  Hu-hu-nu-rikm  ba-hul23 

1 R.  T.,  NIX,  p.  GO,  No.  615;  Dates  of  Bur-Sin  (41  : S;  95  : 34). 

2 See  Dates  of  Bur-Sin  (II  : 17).  3 C.  T.  Ill,  14606,  R.,  1. 

4 II.  L.  C.,  PI.  78,  No.  67,  VII,  14. 

5 T.  T 291 ; R.  T.  C.,  303,  R„  2;  Amh.,  102,  R.,  7. 

fl//.  L.  C.t  PI.  50,  No.  283,  R„  5. 

7 Amh.,  104,  6. 

8 R.  T.  C , 298,  R.,  5(?);  Amh.,  81,  10;  Amh.,  83,  13  ( ba-a-tiig );  Dates  of  Bur-Sin  (47  : 7). 

8 E.  A.  II.,  74-77;  E.  B.  II.,  p.  268;  R.  T.  C„  298,  R.,  5. 

10  Amh.,  82,  6. 

11  B.  E„  I2,  127,  0.,  5. 

12  Dates  of  Bur-Sin  (18  : 11). 

13  For  the  dates  of  the  6th  year  of  Bur-Sin  see  Chapter  IX. 

14  Amh.,  84,  L.  E. 

15  Dates  of  Bur-Sin  (42  : 7). 

16  T.  T.,  50,  R„  3;  75,  L.  E. 

17  E.  II.  B.,  78-86 ; E.  B.  H.,  p.  268. 

18  B.  E.,  I2,  127,  0.,  6;  Amh.,  85,  7 (Sa-as-ru-umki) . 

19  C.  T .,  X,  19065,  L.  E.  This  date-  may  belong  to  Dungi,  54.  See  Thureau-Dangin,  S.  A.  K.  /.,  p.  233. 

20  Written  few . 

21  Dates  of  Bur-Sin  (4  : 16). 

22  The  signs  ]m  and  n have  changed  places  in  B.  E.,  I2,  127,  0.,  7. 

23  C T .,  X,  12248,  R.,  12;  Amh.,  86,  R.,  2;  87,  11,  etc.  See  preceding  reference. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


41 


8th:  mu  us-sa  Hu-u-hu-nu-rikl  ba-Jiid1 
mu  us-sa  Hu-hu-nu-rikl  ba-hul 2 
mu  e-gal  d Bur-'1  Sin  ki-dg  den  Eriduki  ba-tug 3 
mu  en  Eridukl  ba-a-tug 4 
mu  en  Eriduki  ba-tug-gcd 
mu  en  Eriduki  ba-tug 6 
9th : mu  us-sa  en  dEn-ki  Eridukl  ba-tug 7 
mu  us-sa  en  Eridukl  ba-tug 8 
mu  us-sa  en  Eridukl 9 
mu  en  dNanna  Kar-zi(d)-da  ba-a-tug 10 
mu  en  dNanna  Kar-zi(d)-da  ba-tug 11 
mu  en  dNanna  Kar-zi{d)-da 12 
10th13 : mu  us-sa  en  dNanna  Kar-zi(d)-da  ba-tug 14 

Gimil-Sin. 

1st : mu  dGimil-dSin  lugalli 
2d : mw  md-dara-zu-ab  ba-ab-ba-diilB 
mu  md-dara-zu-ab  ba-du 17 
3d:  mu  us-sa  md-dara  zu-ab  ba-du 18 
mn  Si-ma-numki19  ba-hid20 

1 C.  r.,  X,  24959,  R.,  E. 

2 C.  71.,  I,  94-10-16,  2,  R.,  Ill,  1;  I,  94-10-16,  4,  R„  III,  9. 

3 C.  T.,  I,  94-10-16,  5,  E. 

4 Amh.,  97,  14;  99,  14;  99,  11;  100,  14. 

3E.  A.  H.,  87;  E.  B.  H.,  p.  269. 

6 B.  E.,  I2,  127,  O.,  8;  Amh.,  96,  R„  2;  Dates  of  Bur-Sin  (3  : 7;  46  : 15). 

7 Dates  of  Bur-Sin  (134  : 13). 

8 E.  A.  H.,  88;  E.  B.  II.,  p.  269;  Dates  of  Bur-Sin  (32;  45;  54;  59;  103;  104). 

9 Amh.,  106,  8. 

10  Amh.,  117,  10. 

11  B.  E.,  I2,  127,  0.,  9;  E.  A.  II.,  89;  E.  B.  II.,  p.  269;  Amh..  107,  7;  109,  19;  110,  9;  112,  10;  114,  10;  116,  13; 
118,  7;  121,  6;  Dates  of  Bur-Sin  (60  : 5). 

12  Amh.,  119,  10. 

13  Last  year  of  Bur-Sin,  the  same  as  the  accession  year  of  Gimil-Sin. 

14  0.  B.  T.  R.,  169,  according  to  the  catalogue  given  by  Lau,  p.  68.  The  tablet  is  not  published.  I have  given 
the  Sumerian  text  according  to  the  English  translation  by  Lau. 

15  R.  A.,  Ill,  p.  144;  E.  A.  II.,  91;  E.  B.  H.,  p.  275;  Dates  of  Gimil-Sin  (62  : 10;  63  : 7). 

16  Dates  of  Gimil-Sin  (158  : 7). 

17  R.  A.,  Ill,  p.  144. 

18  T.  T.,  240. 

19  See  note  to  Dates  of  Gimil-Sin,  3d  year. 

20  R.  T.  C .,  415,  R.,  4;  Dates  of  Gimil-Sin  (48  : 8). 

6 


42 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


4th:  mu  us-sa  Si-ma-numki  ba-hul1 11 

mudGimil-dSin  lugal  Uru-unu{g)kl-ma-ge  bad-mar-tu  mu-ri-ik  Ti-id-ni-im 
mu-du2 

mu  bdd-mar-tuki  ba-du3 
mu  bad-mar-tu  ba-du 4 
mu  bad-mar-tu  mu3 -did 

[mu  b]ad-mar-t[u  ba-du ] us-sa-bi 7 

5th:  mu  us-sa  dGimil-dSin  lugal  Urii-unu (g) ki-ma-ge  bad-mar-tu  mu-ri-ik  Td-id- 
ni-im  mu-du a 

mu  us-sa  dGimil-dSin  lugal-e  bad-mar-tu  mu-ri-ik  Ti-id-ni-im  mu-[du ]10 
mu  us-sa  bad-mar-tukl  na-dii 1 
mu  us-sa  bad-mar-tu  ba-du 13 
mu  us-sa  bad-mar-tukl  ba-du  mu  us-sa-bi 13 

6th:  mu  dGimil-dSin  lugal  uru-unu (g) ki-ma-ge  na-ru-a-mah  dEn-lil  dNin-lil-ra  mu- 
ne-dii 14 

mu  na-mah  dEn-lil-ld  ba-du 15 

7th:  mudGimil-dSin  lugal  ur ii-unu (g) ki-ma-ge  ma-da  Za-ab-sa-liki  mu-hid-a 16 

8th17:  mudGimil-dSin  lugal  uru-unu(g)ki-ma-ge  ma-gur-mah  dEn-lil  dNin-lil-ra  mu- 
ne-dim 18 

mu  ma-gur-mah  ba-dini 9 

1 T.  T.t  76;  A.,  Ill,  p.  144. 

2 C.  T„  III,  14608,  R.,  5. 

3 R.  T.,  XVIII,  p.  71. 

4 R.  A.,  Ill,  p.  144;  E.  A.  H„  93;  E.  B.  H„  p.  276. 

5 Note  the  prefix  mu. 

6 Dates  of  Gimil-Sin  (116  : 21)> 

7 B.  E„  I2,  127,  R„  1. 

8 Ti  omitted  in  R.  T.  C.,  428,  R.,  7. 

8 R.  T„  XIX,  p.  186;  R.  T.  C„  428,  R„  4. 

10  Dates  of  Gimil-Sin  (49  : 9). 

11  R.  T„  XVIII,  p.  71. 

12  Dates  of  Gimil-Sin  (1  : 23). 

13  R.  T.,  XVIII,  p.  71. 

14  R.  T.  C.,  295,  0.,  9;  Dates  of  Gimil-Sin  (2  : 19,  ki  after  ur  ii-unu  (g ) is  wanting). 

15  B.  E.,  I2,  127,  R.,  2. 

16  B.  E.}  I2,  127,  It.,  3;  Dates  of  Gimil-Sin  (a  number  of  tablets). 

17  See  above. 

18  R.  A.,  Ill,  p.  124. 

19  Dates  of  Gimil-Sin  (9,  130,  131). 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


43 


9th1:  mu  dGimil-dSin  lugal  uru-unu{g)kl-ma-ge  e dLagab  + sig2  aishHukl  mu-du3 
mu  e dLagab  + sig  ba-du* 

Ibi'-Sin. 

1st:  mudl-bi-d Sin  lugal2' 

2d : mu  d I nnan[na]  ba-tuge 

3d-25th:  mudI-bi-dSin  lugal  Si-mu-ru-umki  ba-huV 

2.  Uncertain  Dates.8 

Dungi. 

1.  mu  dDun-gi-ra  d-su(m)-ma9 

mu  lugal-ra  a [ • • ] su(m)-ma10 

2.  mu  en-nam-X11  d Dun-gi-ra-ge  ba-gub  ba-tug 12 

Ibi'-Sin. 

1.  [m]u  dI-bi-dSin  lu[gal]  uru-[unu(g)ki-ma-ge \ Si-mu-ru-umkl  mu-hul 13 
mu  dI-bi-dSin  lugal  Si-mu-ru-umki  ba-hulli 

3.  Unclassified  Dates.15 

1.  mu  bdd-gal  Nibrukl  urii-unu  (g) ki-  tna  ba-rii 16 

2.  mu  bad  urii-unu(g)ki  ba-ru 17 

1 Last  year  of  Gimil-Sin,  the  same  as  the  accession  year  of  Ibi-Sin.  See  above. 

2 Barton  simply  copies  the  sign  as  GAL,  H . L.  C.,  I,  PI.  50,  No.  144,  R.,  3,  and  translates,  “the  great  god 
Gi-shul},”  p.  50;  but  this  is  no  doubt  a misinterpretation  of  the  usual  Lagab  + sig  sign. 

3 R.  T.  C.,  309,  4 ; 429,  R.,  3;  and  reference  in  preceding  note. 

4 R.  A.,  Ill,  p.  144;  R.  S.,  p.  74.  Lau,  0.  B.  T.  R.,  No.  206  (text  not  given)  gives  this  date  as  “the  year  in  which 
the  temple  of  dlnBirGIS.Umi)  was  built.”  He  has  probably  overlooked  the  sign  of  the  name  of  the  deity. 

5 R.  A.,  Ill,  p.  144;  C.  T.,  Ill,  16366,  L.  E.,  16367,  R.,  13;  16368,  R„  17;  Dates  of  Ibi-Sin  (16,  51,  82,  94). 

6 According  to  Thureau-Dangin,  from  an  unpublished  tablet  in  Constantinople,  M.  I.  0.,  831.  See  S.  A.  K.  /., 
pp.  229,  235. 

7 Dates  of  Ibi-Sin  (39  : 7). 

■ For  uncertain  dates  of  Ur-Engur  see  dates  of  that  king. 

9 See  Dungi,  3d-12th. 

10  R.  T.  C..  268,  R.,  8.  11  Sign  R.  E.  C.,  No.  316. 

12  E.  A.  H„  109,  R„  7 :E.B.  H„  pp.  280,  420. 

13  R.  A.,  Ill,  p.  126.  14  Dates  of  Ibi-Sin. 

15  Under  this  head  would  naturally  fall  the  date  given  by  Pinches,  Amh.,  pp.  15,  16,  as  mu  a-ba-gi,  “Year  the 
water  returned,”  but  the  phrase  is  certainly  no  date  at  all.  Under  this  head  would  also  come  the  date  given  by  Barton, 
II.  L.  C.,  IT,  p.  29,  as  “The  year  the  king  repaired  the  house.”  How  Barton  derived  this  meaning  from  the  text  is 
not  easily  seen,  but  he  has  copied  the  last  signs  of  the  line,  II.  L.  C.,  II,  PI  56,  No.  56,  V,  7,  something  like  in-Se-za, 
omitting  the  horizontal  wedge  at  the  bottom  of  the  last  sign.  As  it  now  stands,  it  has,  of  course,  no  meaning.  The 
line  no  doubt  has  to  be  read  mu  lugal  ge  in-pa(d),  “By  tire  name  of  the  king  he  (they)  swore.”  It  is  no  date. 

16  New  dates  (133  : 17).  This  may  be  a fuller  formula  for  the  following. 
v R.  T.  C.,  269,  R.,  3.  This  may  be  a shorter  formula  for  the  preceding. 


44 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 

3.  mu  us-sa  bad-gal  Nibrukl  uru-unu(g)ki-ma  ba-ru 1 

4.  mu  id  A-dNin-tu  ba-al 2 

5.  mu  us  e dNin-BAD  + [?]3  ki-ba-a-gar 4 

6.  mu  lugal-e  dNibrukl-tar‘ 

7.  mu  us-sa  Lu-lu-bu-umki  ba-hul “ 

8.  mu  en  Ga-eski  ba-tug1 

9.  mu  en  dInnanna  unu(g)ki-gaH  mds-e  ni9-pa(d.)10 

mu  en  dInnanna  unu{g)ki  mds-e  i[b ]u 

10.  mu  m[d(l)]-da  z[u(l)]-a[b(l) ] n[e(?) ]12 

11.  mu  Tu-ki-in-PA-mi-ig-ri-sa  dumu-sal  lugal  pa-te-si  Za-ab-sa-liki  ba-an-tug13 
mu  dumu-sal  lugal  pa-te-si  Za-ab-sa-liki  ba-tug 14 

mu-dumu-sal  lugal  pa-te-si  Za-ab-sa-liki  ba-an-tug 15 
mu  us-saki  a-du  II-kam-as  ba-kul 16 

13.  mu  Sibumkl  ba-hul 17 

14.  mu  H,  udnuriki  ba-hul 18 

1 New  dates  (133  : 20). 

2 R.  T.  C.,  270,  R.,  6. 

3 The  sign  in  R.  T.  C.,  271,  is  BAD  with  a broken  sign  inside.  May  be  R.  E.  C.,  No.  366,  but  not  certain.  Cf. 
Thureau-Dangin,  S.  A.  K.  /.,  p.  235. 

iR.  T.  C.,  271,  R„  3. 

5R.  T.  C„  272,  R„  3. 

6 E.  A.  H.,  106,  6 -,E.B.  II.,  pp.  279,  42S. 

7 R.  T.  C„  378,  R„  5. 

8 ga  is  wanting  in  No.  56  : 46. 

9 T.  T .,  296,  has  ni-e. 

10  R.  T.  C.,  401,  R.,  Ill,  3;  T.  T .,  296.  Unclassified  dates  (22,  tablet:  7 ; 56  : 46). 

11  Unclassified  dates  (22,  case:  R.,  2). 

12  Unclassified  dates  (50  : 9). 

13  R.  T.  C.,  404,  R.,  21;  Unclassified  dates  (135  : 42). 

14  T.  7'.,  237,  R.,  5;  276,  R„  6. 

15  T.  T„  243,  R„  6. 

16 II.  L.  C\,  II,  PI.  63,  No.  31,  R...  1.  Barton  translates:  “The  year  the  land  was  devastated  a second  time,”  p. 
30.  But  the  KI  is  no  doubt  only  the  remaining  postposition  after  the  name  of  a country;  the  name  itself  being  left  out, 
whether  by  the  old  Babylonian  scribe  or  by  the  American  copyist,  cannot  be  seen  from  the  reproduced  text.  Both  are 
possible,  however.  If  this  explanation  is  correct,  the  only  known  date  formula  that  would  answer  all  conditions,  not 
considering  the  ul-sa,  would  be  the  formula  for  the  41st  year  of  Dungi,  mu  Gan-lyaA  a-du  II-kam-as  ba-hul.  This  would 
be  an  us-sa  formula  of  the  same  and  would  designate  the  following  or  42d  year  of  Dimgi,  for  which  year  no  us-sa  formula 
has  been  found  as  yet.  Hence  we  would  have  to  read:  mu  us-sa  Gan-had1  a-du  II-kam-as  ba-hul. 

17  Thus  according  to  Lau  in  his  catalogue,  O.  B.  T.  R.,  No.  147,  but  no  text  is  given.  Cf.,  however,  the  name 
Sabum  in  connection  with  Puhunuri,  Morgan,  Scheil  collection,  No.  112. 

18  Thus  according  to  Lau,  O.  B.  T.  R.,  No.  71,  but  again  no  text  is  given.  May  be  an  error  for  // uhunuri. 


VII. 


THE  NAMES  AND  ORDER  OF  THE  MONTHS  DURING 
THE  SECOND  DYNASTY  OF  UR.1 


In  regard  to  the  old  Babylonian  months  of  the  year,  there  has  been  and  is  still 
a great  deal  of  uncertainty.  It  is  true  that  Kugler2  recently  proposed  to  brush 
away  all  difficulties  in  the  matter  by  pointing  out  the  fact  that  Gan-mas  was  the 
first  month  of  the  year.  Unfortunately,  however,  even  if  this  proposition  be  granted, 
there  are  still,  as  will  be  seen,  other  problems  to  be  solved  in  a more  satisfactory 
way. 

First,  then,  we  have  to  note  the  fact  that  not  only  two,  as  Kugler  puts  the 
case,  but  at  least  four  different  nomenclatures  of  the  months  are  used  at  the  same 
time  during  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur.  And  still  there  are  names  for  months  to 
be  found  that  cannot  as  yet  be  identified  with  certainty,  e.g.,  Mes-an-du  and 
Azag-sim,  etc.3  That  other  different  nomenclatures  of  the  old  Babylonian  months 
existed  is  clearly  shown  by  the  list  in  V R.,  43.,  where  six  old  Babylonian  names 
are  given  for  every  name  of  the  months  written  ideographically  during  later  periods. 

As  for  the  time  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur,  however,  we  know  that  at  least 
four  nomenclatures  were  used.  Thus  we  find  a list  of  names  occurring  at  the  time 
of  Sargon  /,  and  even  before,4  still  used  during  this  later  period.  Although  Kugler 
speaks  with  great  authority  and  considers  the  order  of  months,  he  presents  as 
definitely  settled,  the  list  of  old  Babylonian  months  in  use  at  the  time  of  Sargon 
I,  which  he  gives  as  List  A,  is  absolutely  wrong.5 

1 For  treatises  on  the  Babylonian  calendar,  see  Ginzel,  Handbuch  d.  mathem.  u.  techn.  Chronologie,  I,  pp.  107ff. ; 
Kugler,  Z.  A.,  XXII,  pp.  68ff.;  Mahler,  Hilprecht  Anniv.,  pp.  Iff.,  and  references  given  to  previous  publications  on 
the  same  subject;  Meissner,  IF.  Z.  K.  M.,  V,  p.  180;  Muss-Amolt,  ./.  B.  L.,  XI,  pp.  72,  160;  Pinches,  Amh.,  pp. 
XIXff.;  Radau,  E.  B.  II.,  pp.  287ff.;  Thureau-Dangin,  ./.  A.,  Ser.  IX,  Vol.  VII  (1896),  pp.  339ff. ; R.  A.,  IV,  pp.  88, 
89;  0.  L.  Z.,  I,  p.  164;  Z.  A.,  XV,  pp.  409ff.;  Weisbach,  Hilprecht  Anniv.,  pp.  281ff.,  etc. 

2 Z.  A.,  XXII,  pp.  68ff. 

3 See  Chapter  IX. 

4 See  text-editions  by  Genouillac  and  De  la  Fuye. 

6Z.  A.,  XXII,  pp.  68ff. 

[45  ] 


46 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


Disavowing  the  suggestion,  made  by  Thureau-Dangin,  that  Mes-an-du  is  to 
be  regarded  as  an  intercalary  month,  he  inserts  it  between  Mu-su-du  and  Ezen- 
Amar-a-a-si , thus  not  only  bringing  the  whole  list  out  of  harmony  with  List  B,  but 
giving  the  list  13  months,  without  counting  the  intercalary  month.  Thus  Amar- 
a-a-si,  for  example,  would  be  both  the  10th  and  lltli  month  at  the  same  time. 

Now  the  order  as  well  as  the  number  of  the  months  of  this  list,  from  Dumu-zi 
to  Dir-Se-kin-kud,  are  definitely  fixed  by  R.  A.,  IV,  PI.  XXVIII,  No.  77.  We  have 
here  not  only  the  order  and  number  of  months  given,  but  these  are  also  checked 
by  the  summary  at  the  end.  Thus  from  Dumu-zi  to  Dir-Se-kin-kud  are  seven 
months,  the  full  month  of  those  given  always  being  counted.  There  is  no  place 
for  Mes-en-du  in  this  list,  and  hence  it  has  to  be  placed  in  some  other  list  of  nomen- 
clatures. This  list,  marked  I in  the  comparative  list  of  nomenclatures,  has  to  be 
constructed  as  given  in  the  first  column  below.  Then  another  list  can  be  constructed, 
which  by  Thureau-Dangin  is  designed  as  being  characteristic  for  this  period,1  and 
which  has  been  marked  II  in  the  comparative  lists.2  This  is  given  in  the  second 
column  below. 


I.  itu  Ezen-Gan-mas, 

I.  itu  Gan-mas, 

II.  itu  Ezen-Gu(d)-du3-ne-sar-sar, 

II.  itu  Gu(d)-ne-sar-sar, 

III.  itu  Ezen-dN e-su, 

III.  itu  dNe-su, 

IV.  itu  Su-kul, 

IV.  itu  Su-kul, 

V.  itu  Ezen-Dvm-ku, 

V.  itu  Dim-kit, 

VI.  itu  Ezen-1  Dumu-zi, 

VI.  itu  Dumu-zi, 

VII.  itu  Ur, 

VII.  itu  Ezen-d  Dun-gi, 

VIII.  itu  Ezen-d Ba-u, 

VIII.  itu  Ezen-Ba-u, 

IN.  itu  Mu-su-du, 

IX.  itu  Mu-su-du ,6 

X.  itu  Amar-a-a-si, 

X.  itu  Amar-a-a-si, 

XIa.  itu  Se-kin-kud-du ,4 

XIa.  itu  Se-kin-kud,7 

XI6.  itu  Dir-Se-kin-kud, 

Xlh.  itu  Dir-Se-kin-kud* 

XII.  itu  Se-il-la.5 

XII.  itu  Se-il-la. 

But  we  find  even  in  this  comparatively  early  period  names,  which  are  practically 

1 It.  A.,  IV,  pp.  S3,  84. 

2 See  R.  T.  C.,  403;  T.  T.,  3. 

3 Also  written  to,  R.  T.  C.,  357,  edge;  326,  R.  5;  and  ta,  Amh.,  53,  7. 

4 See  R.  T . C . , 55,  It.,  II,  2;  Se-kin-a,  R.  T.  C.,  180,  0.,  3;  cf.  itu  Se-ir-fm-um  Se-kiu-kud-a  and  the  remarkable 
variant,  As-kin-kud-a,  D.  P.  M . , X,  Nos.  11,  12. 

6 For  names  see  also  R.  T.  C.,  180;  Amh.,  pp.  xixff. 

6 No.  136:  18. 

7 Written  itu  Se-sag-kud,  Nos.  100  . 117.  See  also  Nos.  1,  14,  28,  31,  79,  80,  93,  100,  158,  159. 


8 No.  2. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


47 


r-\ 

V4j 


identical  with  the  names  of  the  months,  written  ideographically,  used  during  the  time 
of  Hammurabi  and  even  at  later  periods,  marked  III  in  comparative  lists: 


I.  itu  Bcir-zag-gar,1 

II.  itu  Gu{d)-si-zu ,2 

III.  itu  Slg-ga ,3 

IV.  itu  Su-kul-a ,4 

V.  itu  Bil-bil-gar ,5 

VI.  itu  K in-'1  Innanna , 6 

VII.  itu  Dul-azag,7 


VIII.  itu  Engar-du-a ,8 

IX.  itu  Gdn-gdn-e ,9 

X.  itu  Ab-ba-e,10 

XI.  itu  As-a,11 
XI la.  itu  Se-kin-kud,12 
XII6.  itu  Dir- Se-kin-kud. 13 


Lastly  we  have  an  altogether  new  and  different  list  of  nomenclatures  from  this 
period,  given  in  the  interesting  but  somewhat  mysterious  tablet  of  the  E.  A.  H. 


collection  No.  134,  published  by  Radau, 
IV  in  comparative  lists: 

la.  itu  Se-kin-kud, 

16.  itu  Dir-Se-kin-kud, 

II.  itu  Bar-azag-ku, 

III.  itu  Dun-da-ku, 

IV.  itu  U-ne-ri-mu, 

V.  itu  Ki-sig-dN in-a-zu,1 5 

VI.  itu  Ezen-d  N in-a-zu , 1 6 


14  which  begins  with  Se-kin-kud,  marked 

VII.  itu  A-ki-ti,17 

VIII.  itu  Ezen-d Dun-gi, 

IX.  itu  Su-es-sa ,18 

X.  itu  Ezen-Mah ,19 

XI.  itu  Ezen-An-na,20 

XII.  itu  Ezen-Me-ki-gal.21 


As  far  as  the  order  of  the  months  goes,  these  four  lists  are  prettj7  well  estab- 
lished. The  difficulty  lies  in  the  identification  of  these  different  names  with  the 
particular  months  referred  to.  In  some  cases  the  names,  although  varying  more 
or  less,  can  be  identified  with  each  other,  and  the  order  is  known.  This  gives 
starting  points  for  the  comparison  of  others;  but  in  other  cases  we  are  still  at  a 
loss  as  to  the  reconciliation  of  these  different  nomenclatures. 

The  chief  problem,  however,  is  to  determine  which  month  in  the  different  lists 
actually  was  the  first  month  of  the  year.  In  the  beginning  of  his  study  of  old  Baby- 


I Nos.  4,  44.  51,  85.  117. 

3 Nos.  13,  49,  88. 

5 Nos.  126,  163. 

7 Nos.  85,  128. 

9 Nos.  129,  135. 

II  Nos.  8,  11,  56,  87,  111,  117,  131. 
13  Nos.  100,  117. 

15  No.  45. 

17  No.  116. 

10  Nos.  57,  104. 


2 Also  read  gu(d)-si-sa.  See  Nos.  16,  50,  117,  130. 
4 Nos.  21,  60,  62,  75,  117. 

6 Nos.  39,  86. 

8 Nos.  23,  24,  25,  37. 

10  Nos.  41,  52,  63,  65. 

12  Nos.  1,  14,  28,  31,  79,  80,  93,  100,  158,  159. 

14  E.  B.  H.,  p.  299. 

16  Nos.  17,  32,  94. 

18  No.  53.  Also  written  Su-Sa-es,  No.  46  : 14. 

21  Nos.  81,  93. 


20  No.  34. 


48 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


Ionian  months,  Thureau-Dangin  placed  Gan-mas  as  the  second,  Se-il-la  as  the  first 
month.1  Later  he  has  been  a staunch  supporter  of  the  view  that  Gan-mas  was 
the  first  and  Se-il-la  the  last.2  This  against  Radau,  who  maintained  the  previous 
position  taken.3  Radau,  however,  lias  found  his  followers4  as  well  as  Thureau- 
Dangin.5 

As  for  the  documents  from  Telloh,  and  as  far  as  the  lists  I and  II  are  concerned, 
(he  facts  seem  to  support  the  view  that  Gan-mas  was  the  first,  Se-il-la  the  last 
month  of  the  year  at  this  period.  But  there  are  difficulties  yet  to  be  surmounted, 
as  will  lie  seen  later,  in  regard  to  the  other  lists.  That  accounts  in  the  Telloli  tablets 
run  from  Gan-mas  to  Se-il-la  does  not  prove  the  numerical  order  of  these  months 
in  the  slightest  degree.  Accounts  run  between  any  months  in  the  same  year,  as 
well  as  from  any  month  in  one  year  to  any  other  month  in  another  year,  as  from 
Se-il-la  to  Dir- Se-kin-kud, e from  Se-il-la  to  Gu(d)-ra-ne-sar-sar,7  from  Gu(d)-du- 
ne-sar-sar  to  Se-kin-kud,8  from  Gu(d)-si-zu  to  Bdr-zag-gar-ra ,9  from  Gu{d)-si-zu 
to  Su-kul  the  next  year,10  from  Dim-kii  to  Gan-mas,11  and  from  Amar-a-a-si  to  Amar- 
a-a-si  the  following  year.12  But,  as  has  been  asserted  before,13  the  summary  of  62 
months  during  5 years  in  C.  T .,  Y,  PL  44,  No.  18358,  Y,  10,  and  also  the  summary 
of  15  months  during  2 years  in  0.  B.  T.  R.,  251,  IV,  18, 14  would  show  that,  as  far  as 
the  methods  used  in  Telloh  are  concerned,  Gan-mas  was  counted  as  the  first  month 
and  Se-il-la  as  the  last.  But  how  are  the  lines  0.  B.  T.  R.,  251,  III,  1-10,  Se-kin- 
kud  | u Se-il-la  | mu-gu-za,  etc.  | . . . . | itu  Xll-kam  | to  be  explained? 

To  these  proofs  may  now  be  added  Amh.,  31,  last  col.,  9-17,  itu  Gan-mas  \ mu 
us-sa  bdd-ma-da-ta  \ itu  Se-il-la  | mu  us-sa  e,  etc.  | itu  dir  ni-gdl  \ itu-bi  XXVII  \ . 
Thus  from  Gan-mas,  as  the  first  month  of  the  48th  year  of  Dungi,  to  Se-il-la,  the  last 
month  of  the  50th  year,  with  one  intercalary  month,  will  make  27  months.  Also,  if 
Se-il-la  were  the  first  month,  we  would  expect  an  us-sa  formula  when  tablets  were 

1 See  J.  A.,  Ser.  IX,  Vol.  VII  (1896),  p.  339ff.;  R.  A.,  IV,  pp.  88,  89. 

2 See  especially  Z.  A.,  XV,  pp.  409ff. ; also  0.  L.  Z.,  I,  p.  164. 

3 E.  B.  II.,  p.  287ff. 

4 Ginzel,  Handbuch,  p.  114;  Lau,  O.  B.  T.  R.,  p.  41 ; Pinches,  Amh...  p.  XXIII. 

6 Huber,  P.  K.  U.  N.,  p.  X;  Kugler,  Z.  A.,  XXII,  pp.  68ff. 

6 R.  T.  C„  402,  O.,  11;  R„  18. 

7 Amh.,  53,  1-7. 

8 C.  T .,  V,  PI.  39,  No.  17752,  IV,  5-10. 

9 No.  117. 

10  No.  133. 

11  T.  T .,  3. 

12 II.  L.  C„  I,  PI.  1,  No.  67. 

13  Thureau-Dangin,  Z.  A.,  XV,  pp.  409ff. ; Kugler,  Z.  A.,  XXII,  pp.  7 Iff 

14  Kugler,  Z.  .4.,  XXII,  p.  72. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


49 


dated  in  this  month,  as  only  in  exceptional  cases  the  event,  on  account  of  which  a 
new  date  formula  would  be  instituted,  would  occur  in  the  very  first  month  of  the 
year.  Thus  Amh.,  81  and  86,  are  dated  itu  Se-il-la  | mu  en,  etc.,  and  C.  T .,  Ill, 
14600,  itu  Se-il-la  | mu  Ur-bil-lumki  \ , and  not  mu  us-sa d Bur-  Sin  lugal,  which  was 
an  earlier  date  formula  for  t he  same  year.  On  the  other  hand,  Gan-mas  has  an  us-sa 
formula,  mu  us-sa  en-mah,  Amh.,  80,  8;  but  the  later  formula  of  the  same  year  was 
mu  en  am-gal,  etc.,  being  the  5th  year  of  Bur-Sin. 

In  C.  T.,  I,  PI.  1,  Nos.  94-10-16,  59,  R.,  12,  the  phrase  itu  X-kam  takes  the 
regular  place  of  the  name  of  a month  immediately  before  the  date  formula  of  the 
year.  By  itself  the  phrase  might  perhaps  mean  “10  months”  as  well  as  “the 
10th  month.”  Still  no  summary  of  the  months  given  above  on  the  tablet  will 
make  10  months.  On  the  other  hand,  the  last  month  of  the  accounts  is  Amar-a- 
a-si,  which  is  the  10th  month  of  the  year,  if  Gan-mas  is  placed  first. 

The  material  and  hence  the  findings  in  regard  to  Gan-mas  and  Se-il-la,  how- 
ever, are  entirely  confined  to  Telloh  tablets.  In  regard  to  the  tablets  excavated 
at  Nippur,  on  the  other  hand,  I have  not  found,  as  yet,  a single  tablet  where  the 
months  Gan-mas  or  Se-il-la  are  mentioned.  From  this  fact  it  might  be  argued 
that  the  lists  of  which  these  two  months  form  part,  were  used  particularly  at  Telloh. 
Still  other  names  of  these  lists,  as  Gu{d)-du-ne-sar-sar,  N e-sit  and  Dumu-zi,  are 
found  on  Nippur  tablets. 

In  regard  to  the  lists  III  and  IV,  which  seem  to  predominate  on  the  Nippur 
tablets,  the  burning  question  is  also  the  numerical  order  of  the  months.  Which 
were  the  first  months?  Unfortunately,  this  cannot  be  absolutely  determined  with 
the  material  at  hand. 

In  the  document  published  and  discussed  by  Radau,1  the  month  Se-kin-kud 
heads  the  list  of  months,  while  at  the  same  time  the  order  of  the  months  is  conclu- 
sively determined.2  This  would  point  to  this  month  as  the  first  month  of  the  year 
during  some  period  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur;  but  it  does  not,  of  course,  by  itself 
supply  a conclusive  argument  for  such  a proposition.  Another  document  from 
the  same  period,  Amh.,  85,  seems  to  support  this  view,  however.  The  tablet  in 
question  is  dated  in  the  month  of  Ezen-Ba-u,  but  the  envelope  or  case,  in  which  it 
was  originally  enclosed,  is  dated  in  the  month  Se-kin-kud.  The  year,  according  to 
Pinches3 — the  text  of  the  envelope  not  being  published  in  extenso — is  the  same  on  both 

1 E.  B.  H„  pp.  299ff. 

2 See  also  No.  93  : 8-10,  itu  Se-kin-kud-ta  | itu  Ezen  Me-ki-gdl-su  | itu-bi  Xll-a-an , which  establishes  the  order 
of  the  mouths. 

3 Amh .,  p.  156. 

7 


50 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


the  tablet  and  the  envelope,  viz.,  the  52d  year  of  Dungi 1 or  the  6th  year  of  Bur-Sm. 
As  the  tablet  must  have  been  made  and  dated  before  being  enclosed  in  the  envelope, 
and  as  the  latter  consequently  must  have  been  dated  later  than  the  tablet — but,  if 
Pinches  is  right,  in  the  same  year — Se-kin-kud  must  precede  Ezen-Bau,  and  thus  be 
the  first  month  of  the  year. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  clear  that  Se-kin-kud  could  not  very  well  be  the  first 
month.  Tablets  are  dated  in  this  month  without  an  us-sa  formula,  which  would 
show  that  this  month  came  later  in  the  year.2  Still  the  Se-kin-kud  of  these  tablets 
may  belong  to  list  I or  II,  where  it  was  the  11th  month,  or  to  list  III,  where  it  per- 
haps was  the  12th  month,  and  would  tend  to  prove  that  during  the  reign  of  the 
kings  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur  the  calendar  was  changed  so  as  to  make  Se-kin- 
kud  the  11th  month  of  List  I and  II,  the  12th  month  of  List  III  and  the  1st 
month  of  the  list  IV.  This  would  also  relieve  us  of  the  difficulty,  otherwise  arising, 
that  although  Hammurabi  changed  the  calendar  by  inserting  an  extra  month,3 
the  numerical  order  of  the  list  III  of  the  Ur  dynasty  would  be  the  same  as  that  of 
the  Hammurabi  period  and  of  later  Babylonian  and  Assyrian  times.  This  would 
also  satisfactorily  explain,  why  the  7th  month  was  called  A-ki-ti,  the  beginning 
month  of  the  (half)  year.  Bdr-azag-ku , if  it  really  is  to  be  identified  with  Bdr-zag- 
gar,  will  come  a month  later  than  in  the  list  III,  likewise  Ezen-Dungi.  Ezen-Me- 
ki-gdl  would  lie  the  12th  month,  to  which  there  are  no  known  obstacles.  On  the 
contrary,  V R.,  43,  R.,  7,  places  this  month  opposite  Se-kin-kud,  or  the  12th  month 
of  List  III.  In  any  case,  the  customary  identification  of  the  old  month  of  Dumu-zi 
with  the  later  arhu  Du'uzu  cannot  be  maintained. 

Thus,  as  over  against  the  certainty  of  Kugler,  I still  fully  agree  with  such  a 
careful  and  experienced  investigator  as  Pinches,  that  “there  is  still  much  to  learn 
concerning  the  calendar  of  this  early  period.”4 

On  the  supposition  that  there  were  changes  made  in  the  calendar  during  this 
period,  of  which  we  still  have  no  definite  knowledge,  or  on  the  supposition  that 
perhaps  different  nomenclatures  were  used  in  different  Babylonian  centres,  and 
until  fresh  material  will  throw  new  light  on  the  subject,  I venture,  provisionally, 
to  harmonize  the  four  different  nomenclatures  used  during  the  second  dynasty  of 
Ur  in  the  following  comparative  lists.  In  regard  to  list  IV,  however,  I am  not  sure, 
whether  it  would  not  prove  more  harmonious  simply  to  ignore  the  evidence  which 
the  E.  A.  H.  tablet  and  Amh,.,  85,  seem  to  furnish,  and  consequently  make  Bar-azag- 
ku  the  first,  Se-kin-kud  the  last  month. 

1 In  the  9th  year  of  Bur-Sin,  Se-kin-kud,  according  to  the  year  formula,  would  not  be  the  first  month.  See 
Amh.  116,  12.  2 H.  L.  C.,  I,  PI.  45,  No.  35;  Amh.,  116,  Nos,  1,  14,  28,  31,  79,  80,  93,  158  and  159. 

3 L.  /.  H.,  No.  14,  6.  4 Amh.,  p.  XXII, 


From  the  temple  archives  of  nippur. 


51 


Nomenclatures  of  Old  Babylonian  Months 

USED  DURING  THE  SECOND  DYNASTY  OF  Ur. 


I. 

II. 

III. 

IV. 

Ia 

16 

itu  Gan-mas 

itu  Gan-mas 

itu  Bdr-zag-gar 

itu  Se-kin-kud 
itu  D ir- Se-kin-k  ud 

II. 

itu  Gu(d)-du-ne-sar- 
sar 

itu  Gu(d)-ne-sar- 
sar 

itu  Gu  (d)  -si-zu 

itu  Bar-azag-ku 

III. 

itu  Ezen-d  N e-sit 

itu  dNe-su 

itu  Sig-ga 

itu  Dun-da-ku 

IV. 

itu  Su-kul 

itu  Su-kul 

itu  Su-kul-a 

itu  U -ne-ri-mu 

V. 

itu  Ezen-Dim-ku 

itu  Dim-ku 

itu  Bil-bil-gar 

itu  Ki-sig-d Nm-a- 
zu 

VI. 

itu  Ezen-d  Dumu-zi 

itu  Ezen-d Dumu- 
zi 

itu  Kin-dInnanna 

itu  Ezen-d Nin-a- 
zu 

VII. 

itu  Ur 

itu  Ezen-dDun-gi 

itu  Dul-azag 

itu  A-ki-ti 

VIII. 

itu  Ezen-d  Ba-u 

itu  Ezen-dBa-u 

itu  E?igar-du-a 

itu  Ezen-dDun-gi 

IX. 

itu  Mu-su-du 

itu  Mu-su-du 

. 

itu  Gdn-gan-e 

itu  Su-es-sa 

X. 

itu  Amar-a-a-si 

itu  Amar-a-a-si 

itu  Ab-ba-e 

itu  Ezen-Mah 

XIa 

XI6 

itu  Se-kin-kud-du 

itu  Dir- Se-kin-kud- 
du 

itu  Se-kin-kud 

itu  Dir-Se-kin- 
kud 

itu  As-a-an 

itu  Ezen-An-na 

Xlla  1 

XII6  : 

itu  Se-il-la 

itu  Se-il-la 

itu  Se-kin-kud 

itu  D ir-Se-k  in-k  ud 

i 

itu  Ezen-M  e-k  i-gdl 

VIII. 


TRANSCRIPTION  AND  TRANSLATION  OF  SPECIMEN 

TABLETS. 


In  presenting  these  translations  of  specimen  tablets,  it  hardly  needs  to  be 
emphasized  that  some  of  them,  especially  the  translations  of  the  documents  of 
court  proceedings,  necessarily  must  be  more  or  less  tentative.  In  some  cases  the 
texts  will  allow  more  than  one  rendering  and  interpretation  grammatically  and 
lexicographically  possible.  A number  of  terms  stand  either  quite  isolated  or  are 
used  in  a connection  different  from  others  known  before.  Hence  a definite  inter- 
pretation is  not  possible  with  the  rather  scant  material  at  hand.  As  pointed  out 
before,  the  so-called  ‘ ‘contracts”  have  been  rather  rare  from  this  period  so  far,  but 
further  publications  of  new  texts  will  no  doubt  throw  fresh  light  on  many  problems, 
which  it  has  been  impossible  to  solve  satisfactorily  in  this  book.  The  most  tangible 
translation  of  the  documents  in  question  are  here  given,  however,  mostly  with 
a view  of  calling  attention  to  the  difficulties  and  possibilities,  and  thus  paving  the 
way  for  a more  definite  and  final  interpretation  of  these  and  similar  documents, 


which  no  doubt  will  come  to  light  later. 


I. 


(Text,  PI.  1,  No.  1;  Halft.,  Plate  I,  Nos.  1,  2.) 

Court  Proceedings. 

A-la-la  brings  his  slave  Sir-kci  into  court,  in  order  to  have  put  on  record  that 
whenever  Sir-ka  runs  away,  he  would  be  subjected  to  the  treatment  accorded  to 
a runaway.  His  mother  and  his  sister  seem  to  be  made  responsible  for  his  conduct. 


1.  Y Sir-ka 

2.  ur  A-la-la-kam 

3.  A-la[-i]a  igi[-n]i-ni- 

\ig]i  + gar1 2 3  1 


A certain  Sir-ka, 
who  is  a slave  of  A-la-la, 
A-la-la  made 
to  appear. 


1 Cf.  igi-ni-in-gar-ar-ra,  Sd-tilla,  IX,  5;  also  p.  126.  Here  the  phrase  is  causative  and  corresponds  to  the  later 
kurrubu,  A.  B.  P.  R.,  p.  125,  or  better  uktarriteu,  A.  D.  D.,  No.  1,  p.  262. 

[52] 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


53 


5.  mu  lugal  [ujd-ba1  HA  +A 2 ge3- 

6.  n[a]4-ma 

7.  ner-da  he-a 5 

8.  ne-[i]n-du(gY 

9.  Zci-an-me-ni  ama-ni 

10.  u Gin-dEn-zu  nin- 

1 1 . na-ni 

12.  su-tu(r ) nu-HA  -jA-da1 

13.  ba-an-gub-su 8 

14.  Y Lugal- Lagab 

15.  Y Nam-ha-ni 

16.  Y Ur-E-gi-a 9 

17.  Y Ses-kal-la 

18.  Y E(GA ) j-ner-e-ba-ul 

19.  Y Us-a-ni 

20.  Y Pap-ni-mu 

2 1 . galu-enim-ma-bi-me 

22.  Se-kin-kud  II 


‘ ‘By  the  name  of  the  king,  on  the  day 
when  an  escape  indeed 
he  will  make, 
a ner-da  may  he  be/’ 
he  said. 

Zan-me-ni,  his  mother, 
and  Gin-Sin,  his  sister, 

for  (his)  remaining (?),  that  he  shall  not 
run  away, 
they  shall  stand. 

Lugal-Lagab, 

Nam-ha-ni, 

Ur-E-gi-a, 

Ses-kalla , 

E(GA)  +ner-e-ba-ul, 

Us-ani, 

Pap-ni-mu, 

witnesses. 

Month  Se-kin-kud,  second, 


1 The  inside  of  the  sign  preceding  bn  is  broken  away,  but  the  outside  lines  seem  to  make  the  reading  UD  cer- 
tain. It  could  be  E,  however.  In  any  case  the  interpretation  would  be  very  much  the  same. 

UD  by  itself  might  of  course  stand  for  enu,  Br.  7781,  besides  i-nu,  also  written  i-na,  .4.  B.  it.  U.,  121,  7;  187,  6. 
The  ba  could  possibly  be  verbal  prefix  to  IJA  + .1 , cf.  V It.,  25,  16a,  but  on  account  of  the  verb  following  it  is  better 
to  take  IJA  +A  as  an  infinitive  form.  Thus  I read  ud-ba,  “the  day  when.”  Cf.  C.  7'.,  XV,  24,  16;  XXIV,  16, 17 ; also 
Radau,  Hilprecht  Anniv.,  p.  386. 

2 The  sign  is  IJA  enclosed  by  .4 ; cf.  line  12  and  No.  4 (III) : 7.  I take  the  sign  as  a composition  of  IJA  and  A, 
which  later  were  written  separately,  IJA- A,  and  expressing  the  verbal  meaning  of  fialriku,  Br.  11856.  I take  the 
form  here  as  infinitive,  followed  by  a finite  verb  expressed  by  Ma.  For  the  construction  cf.  Gudea,  Cyl.  A,  XI,  14; 
B,  IX,  2.  See  further  Chapter  IX. 

3 NE  could  possibly  be  taken  as  postposition,  also  expressing  the  idea  of  “when,”  cf.  C.  T .,  XV,  17,  15,  19,  21. 
It  could  be  overhanging  vowel,  de,  as  it  appears  to  be  in  No.  4 (III):  7,  cf.  R.  II.,  No.  38,  1 -3;  C.  T.,  XVII,  17,  8,  9; 
Gudea,  Cyl.  A,  VIII,  2;  XIV,  7.  Still  it  seems  better  to  take  it  a.s  the  emphatic  ge,  equal  to  fie,  Br..  p.  542. 

4 The  sign  is  badly  broken,  but  it  is  most  likely  na. 

5 NER.DA  may  perhaps  be  taken  as  a term  for  a runaway  slave,  who  is  at  the  entire  mercy  of  his  master 
See  Chapter  IX. 

6 Cf.  Sd-tilla,  XVI,  7;  XVII,  10;  XVIII,  2. 

1 SU.T(J(R)  may  be  a phonetic  writing  for  SU.DUR,  i.e.,  TU(R)  for  DUR  —KU,  aisdbu,  Br.  10523.  Cf. 
Gudea,  Cyl.  A,  XXVI,  27.  Cf.,  however,  the  term  St) .DU-ma,  B.  T.  N.,  135,  28;  S.  C.  N.,  p.  131. 

8 DU  = kanu,  Br.  2884,  or  nazazu,  Br.  4893,  or  sak&nu,  Br.  4897. 

8 Or  Ur-Mu-gi  a. 


54 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  IT.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


23.  mu  us-sa  bad-mar-  year  after  westland- 

24.  tu  ba-du  wall  built. 


II. 

(Text,  PI.  2,  No.  2;  Halft.,  Plate  I,  Nos.  3,4.) 

Court  Proceedings. 

Lugal-iskim-zidda  brings  suit  against  Ur-Rammdn  in  regard  to  a head  office 
of  the  temple. 


1 . nam-pa-isib-da 1 

2 . Lugal- isk i n t-zi(d) - da 3 

3.  hi  Ur-IM  du(g) 

ni-gdl-la 3 
5.  Ur-'IM  la-ba- 
tS.  a-du-u-da 4 

7.  Lugal- iskim-zi( d)-da 

8.  [m]u  lugal-bi  in-na-pa(d) 

9.  [ . . . . d]u(g)-ga-ni  nu-banda 

10.  [ . . . . ]jl  Dim-pa-e 

11.  damn  Ur-Ba-u 

12.  Lul-a  damn  Ur-gu 

13.  A-ka-ka-mw' 


In  regard  to  the  head  priestly  office, 
concerning  which  Lugal-iskim-zidda 
has  brought  suit  against 
Ur-Rammdn,  and 
to  which  Ur-Rammdn 

has  not  given  attention, 

Lugal- isk  im-z  idda 

by  the  name  of  the  king  swore. 

[ . . . . d]ug-ga-ni,  the  overseer, 

[ . . . . ]-Dun-pa-e, 
son  of  Ur-Bau, 

Lul-a,  son  of  Ur-gu, 

A-ka-ka-mu, 


‘The  NAM. PA. ME,  as  can  be  seen  from  the  autograph  and  halftone  reproductions,  is  not  very  certain  as 
far  as  the  PA. ME  is  concerned.  The  signs  could  possibly  be  read  GUIt  or  PA.DIS.  GUR  = kunukku.  Hr.  3362, 
and  NAM. GUR  might  denote  the  oflice  of  sealing,  a “clerkship.”  GUR  also  stands  for  tarn,  Br.  3367,  and  NAM  .GUR 
could  thus  mean  “restitution.”  ME,  read  isib,  on  the  other  hand  denotes  a priestly  office,  as  pasisu,  Br.  10375, 
ramku,  Br.  10376,  siptu,  Br.  10379,  and  tertu,  Br.  10380.  See  also  II . IF.,  p.  147a;  K.  1! . , VI1,  p.  463.  PA  always 
denotes  a head  officer,  with  others  under  his  charge,  or  an  overseer.  See  Radau,  E.  B.  H .,  p.  413.  Temple  offices  are 
always  the  object  of  bartering  in  the  contracts  and  lawsuits.  See,  for  example,  Poebel,  B.  E.}  VP,  Nos.  37,  39  and 
66.  The  nam-pa-isib  would  thus  be  an  overseer  of  priests,  a priestly  head  office. 

2 For  the  reading  of  iskim,  IGI.DUB,  see  M.  7142.  Of.  Tallqvist,  N.  B.  N.,  pp.  xii,  335;  also  M.  7149. 

3 KA-ni-gdl  generally  stands  for  ruggurnu,  Br.  612,  with  the  preposition  a-na,  see  Urkunden,  117,  12,  ell  or 
rnuli-hi,  S.  P.  G.  A .,  p.  126;  B.  F.,  CXIII,  14;  but  the  construction  here  would  correspond  to  the  it-ti , B.  V .,  CXIII, 
16,  used  with  denu  in  similar  connections. 

4 The  la  as  a Sumerian  negative  is  emphatic,  a expresses  lu.  Cf.  R.  H.,  80,  20;  Hdprecht  Anniv.,  pp.  400,  419. 

The  difficulty  as  to  the  translation  of  this  document,  aside  from  the  exact  meaning  of  the  first  term,  is  to  be  able 

to  decide  in  what  definite  meaning  the  verb  KAK  here  is  employed.  As  it  apparently  is  a question  in  regard  to  an 
office,  epesu  with  the  meaning  “to  practise,  exercise,”  may  be  suggested.  The  accused  man  has  not  or  shall  not  exer- 
cise that  office.  Also  pak.adu  would  express  this  idea.  Another  interpretation  would  be  to  take  KAK  as  meaning 
sanaku,  which  also  expresses  the  idea  “to  appear  before  the  judge,  to  be  summoned,  also  obey.”  Hence  the  docu- 
ment would  be  a second  appeal  for  the  dispute  to  be  settled,  the  defendant  having  paid  no  attention  to  the  first,  or 
he  having  not  been  summoned. 

6 MU  may  be  a title. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


55 


14. 

Ba-ka-ka 

Ba-ka-ka , 

15. 

Ur-dEn-zu 

Ur-Sin 

16. 

Ur-Engar-d  Utu 

Ur-Engar-Samas, 

17. 

galu-enmi-ma-bi-me 

witnesses. 

18. 

itu  Dir-Se-kin-kud 

Month  1)  ir-Se-k  in-kud, 

19. 

mu  dGimil-dSin  lugal 

Year  Gimil-Sin,  king 

20. 

Urii-unu  ( g ) -ma-ge 

of  Ur  made  the 

21. 

na-ru-a-mah  dEn-lil 

great  stele 

22. 

dNin-lil-ra  mu-ne-du 

for  Enlil  and  Ninlil. 

III. 

(Text,  PI.  3,  No.  4.) 

Court  Proceedings. 

Galu-Enlil  takes  the  oath  that  he  will  not  run  away  from  the  house  of  Ur- 
Nusku. 


1 . Gal  u-d  En-l  il-l  a 

2.  clumu  Galu-d  U (d) -du(g ) -ge 

3.  Ur-dPA.KU-ra 

4.  mu-lugal  ni-na-pa(d) 

5.  e-za  ga-gin1  2 

6.  ga-a-an-ta-e3 4 5 

7.  [ba]-ra-ba-H A +A-d e-sid 

8.  [ne ( ?) -in-n]a-du (g) 

9.  [ Y][  . . . ]-e-el-la 

10.  Y Ba-la-an-gi 

11.  Y Su-JJr-ra 

12.  ukus-nita  pa-al 3 


Galu-Enlil, 
son  of  Galu-Udug, 
to  Ur-Nusku 

by  the  name  of  the  king  he  swore: 
“From  thv  house  I will  go, 

I will  indeed  depart,  (but) 
not  shall  I run  away,” 
he  said. 

[ . . . ]-e-el-la, 

Ba-lan-gi, 

Su-Ur-ra 

the  ukus-nita  of  the  pa-al , 


1 For  the  scheme  of  this  document  cf.  the  much  later  document  of  a similar  nature,  B.  V.,  No.  CXLV. 

2 Schorr  makes  the  statement  that  the  second  person,  as  a pronoun  or  subject,  is  never  found  in  old  Babylo- 
nian contracts,  Hilprecht  Anniv.,  p.  28,  but  this  seems  to  be  a clear  case. 

3 The  two  lines  could  perhaps  also  be  translated:  "Thy  house  I will  come  to,  from  thy  house  I will  go  out,” 
i.e.,  he  would  go  in  and  out,  but  not  run  away. 

4 Cf.  No.  1 (I) : 5,  12.  See  Chapter  IX. 

5 For  the  sign  see  Code  of  Hfammurabi,  IX,  90 ; L.  I.  II .,  No.  1,  19,  22;  3,  7,11;  C . T .,  VI,  29,  5.  In  regard  to  the 
reading  of  MIR.US,  it  will  be  noted  that  the  explaining  gloss  stands  between  the  MIR  and  the  US,  and  this  would 
point  to  the,  reading  ukus,  not  uku,  for  MER,  thus  for  the  group  ukus-us,  or  better  ukus-nita.  That  the  ukus-nita  in 
our  text  was  hi  the  service  of  a pa-al  would  tend  to  support  the  view  expressed  by  Daiches,  Z.  A.,  XVIII,  p.  222,  that 
these  officials,  in  some  instances  at  least,  did  not  hold  positions  of  great  trust.  Cf.  also  Meissner,  Z.  A.,  XVIII,  p.  393; 
and  Langdon,  Babploniaca,  I,  pp.  289,  290. 


50  SUMERIAN 

DOCUMENTS, 

II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 

1 3 . galu-en im-ma-b i-me 

witnesses. 

14.  itu  Bdr-zag-gar-ra 

Month  B ar-zag-gar-ra 

15.  ud  XXV-ba-ni 1 

day  15th, 

16.  mu  Ilu-h u-nu-ri'1 

year  when  IJuhunuri 

17.  ba-hfd-a 

IV. 

devastated. 

(Text,  PI.  4,  No.  7;  Halft.,  Plate  II,  Nos.  5,  6.) 

Bond. 

In  case  Ur-Enlil  does  not  pay  the  grain  on  his  account,  Ur- Da-mu  shall  do  it. 


1.  tukundi-bv' 

In  case 

2.  sa(g)  dub  Ur-  En-ld-ld-ka 

on  account  of  Ur-Enlil , 

3.  X se-gur 

10  gur  corn, 

4.  nu-ub-ma 4 

are  not  forthcoming, 

5.  se-bi  Ur-  Da-mu-ge 

its  corn  Ur-Da-mu 

6.  ib-zu-ziv' 

shall  bring  in. 

7.  mu  lugal-bi 

By  the  name  of  his  king 

8.  ni-pa(d) 

he  has  sworn. 

9.  Y Ur-d  Su-mah 

Ur-Su-mah, 

10.  Y Ad-da-kal-la 

Ad-da-kal-la , 

11.  Y Kalam-ne-mu 6 

Kalam-ne-mu , 

12.  Y Utu-sd(g)-ga 

Utu-sagga, 

1 3 . gal  u-e  n im-ma-b  i-  me 

witnesses. 

14.  mu  Si-mu-ru-um 

Year  Simurum 

15.  llba-hul. 

devastated. 

V. 

(Text,  PI.  5,  No.  11.) 

Promissory  Note. 

Elag-nu-a  and  Nur-ili  has  given  Lugal-salim  1 sekel  of  silver  as  a loan.  On 
a certain  day  he  promises  to  pay  it  hack. 

1 Perhaps  to  be  read  ml.  2 Erroneously  written  TJU.  3 See  Chapter  IX. 

4 Whatever  particular  verb  Shi  II  stands  for,  as  asu,  Br.  4302;  kasddu,  4319;  kunukku,  4322;  satdru , 4336,  it  must 
denote  deliver y or  payment.  Cf.  ib-ta-b-a  = u-se-si,  B.  E.,  VI1,  42,  6;  Urkunden,  V.  A.  Th.,  4922,  p.  32. 

5 ZU .ZU  = causative  form  of  ercbu,  cf.  Br.  133;  also  afiazu,  IIP,  Br.  143,  “cause  to  take,  i.e.,  give,  pay.”  It 

would  perhaps  be  possible  to  interpret  the  document  in  a different  way  by  considering  Ur-Da-mu  as  the  lender , not  the 
bond-giver.  The  stipulation  then  would  be  that  if  the  grain  was  not  delivered,  the  creditor  would  increase,  i.e.,  place 
interest  on  the  loan.  6 Or  TJku-ne-niu. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


57 


1.  [E]-la-ag-nu-al 

2.  u Nu-ur-i-Ti 

3.  dumu  Da-dI-li 

4.  I gin  azag-ud-ta  mu-si(d)-dam2 

5.  \Lu\gal-sa-lim-ra 

6.  [p]ad-da3 

mu  lugal- 

7.  bi  ni-pa(d) -da 

8.  igi  A-kal-la  pa 

9.  igi  Galu-dRa 

10.  igi  Galu-d  En-lil-ld 

11.  igi  Ur-Luh 

12.  igi  !J u-pi-pi  ses-gal- 

13.  nam* 

14.  igi  Ma-da-i-li 

15.  galu-enim-ma-bi-me 

16.  itu  As  ud  XI  ni-la 5 

17.  mu  en-am-unu  (g)  -gal- 

18.  dInnanna  ba-tug-gd 6 


Elag-nu-a, 
and  Nur-ili, 
son  of  Da-Ili, 

1 sekel  of  silver  have  given 

to  Lugal-salim 

as  a partial  payment^?). 

By  the  name  of 
his  king  he  has  sworn 
before  A-kal-la,  the  pa, 
before  Galu-Ra, 
before  Galu-Enlil, 
before  Ur-Luh, 
before  Hu-pi-pi,  his  oldest 
brother, 

before  Mada-ili, 
witnesses. 

In  the  month  of  As,  the  11th  day,  he 
shall  pay  it. 

Year  when  the  high  priest  of 

the  great  abode  of  Innanna  appointed. 


VI. 

(Text,  PI.  6,  No.  13;  Halft.,  Plate  II,  Nos.  7,  S;  III,  Nos.  9-14.) 

Promissory  Note. 

At  the  making  up  of  the  accounts  of  the  business  transactions  between  Ur-Luh 
and  Galu-Utu  there  is  found  a surplus  of  1 mana  10  sekel  of  silver.  Galu-Utu  receives 
this  amount  as  a loan,  or  as  an  investment  and  promises  to  pay  it  at  a stated  time. 

1 The  seal  reads  I-la-ag-nu-a.  Thus  the  name  obviously  is  written  phonetically  and  is  Semitic  as  the  following 
Nu-fir-i-l'i. 

2 Cf.  the  document  of  the  same  character,  .4.  B.  P.,  No.  19. 

8 In  later  contracts  azag  pad-da  is  equal  to  sebirtu,  Br.  9918,  which  Meissner  explains  as  “die  Nebenkosten  beim 
Kaufe” ; also  partial  payment,  Muss-Arnolt,  p.  10056.  Here  it  is  something  that  has  to  be  repaid,  if  ni-la,  line  16,  is 
futurum,  which  seems  to  be  the  case. 

4 Cf.  T.  T .,  104,  R.,  8,  se)-a-na. 

5 That  ni-la  is  written  phonetically  for  ni-la  is  seen  from  C.  T.,  VI,  Pi.  38,  11;  VIII,  PI.  39,  10,  as  Ranke  has 
pointed  out,  B.  E.,  VI1,  p.  19.  Cf.  ni-la-a,  No.  13  (VI):  5,  and  ni-la,  No.  15  (VIII):  17.  That  it  stands  for  Osakal, 
not  iikul,  see  the  form  ni-ld-e  on  tablet,  but  i-sa-ya-al  on  envelope,  B.  E.,  VI1,  No.  51,  13.  Cf.  also  A.R.  U.,  II,  Nos. 
35,  10;  36,  9;  47,  10;  49,  10;  51,  10,  13.  See  Nos.  13  (VI):  15;  15  (VIII):  17;  cf.  Huber,  Hilprechl  Anniv.,  pp . 206ff. 

8 See  Chapter  IX. 

8 


58 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


1.  I ma-na  X gin  azag-ucl 

2.  si-ni-ib  nig-sid-ag 

3.  ki  Ur-Luh-ta 

4 . Galu-dUt u su-ba-t  i 

5.  itu  Su-kul  ud  VII  ni-la-a 1 

6.  si(m)  -mu-da2 

7.  mu  lugal  vn-pa(d) 

8.  tukundi-bi 

9.  nu-na-an-si(m) 

10.  ib-tap-pi-a? 

mu  lugal 

11.  in-pa(d ) 

12.  igi  Lugal-azag-zu 

13.  [igi]  Lugal-itu-Da 

14.  [igi]  A-lul-a 

15.  [h/]f  Ur-d Ma-mi 

16.  [i]tu  Sig  it-ru  ba-gar 4 

17.  mu  dSu-dEn-zu 

18.  lugal  Uru-unu(g)kl-ge 

19.  md-gur-mah 

20.  d En-lil  d Nin-lil-ra  ba-dim 


1 mana  10  sekel  of  silver, 
being  a surplus,  when  the  accounts 
had  been  made  up, 
from  Ur-Luh, 

Galu-Utu  has  received. 

On  the  7th  day  of  Su-kul  he  shall 
pay  it. 

Concerning  the  payment, 

by  the  name  of  the  king  he  swore. 

In  case 

he  does  not  pay  it, 
it  shall  be  increased. 

By  the  name  of  the  king 
he  has  sworn, 
bef ore  Lugal-azag-zu, 
before  Lugal-itu-Da, 
before  A-lul-a, 
before  Ur-Ma-mi. 

(In)  the  month  of  Sig,  the  document 
was  drawn  up ; 
year  Gimil-Sin,  king  of 
Ur,  built  the  great 
ship  of  Enlil  and 
Ninhl. 


VII. 

(Text,  PI.  8,  No.  14;  Halft.,  Plate  IV,  Nos.  15,  16.) 

Purchase  of  a Palm  Grove. 

A commercial  agent,  Ur-Nusku,  purchases  a palm  grove,  40  sar  in  area,  on 
behalf  of  En-lil-al-sdg,  and  he  pays  as  purchase  money  4 mana  84-  sekel  of  silver. 

1.  XL  sar  ki-'jishsar-sd(g)  40  sar  of  a grove  of  palm  trees, 

2.  4 ma-na  VIII  4 gin  azag-ud-su  for  half  a mana  84-  sekel  of  silver, 

1 Cf.  No.  11  (V):  16. 

2 The  envelope  adds  ne-ka.  si(m ) = nadinu , Br.  4118. 

3 TAB  = esepu,  Br.  3762,  “to  add,  increase,  double,”  hence  the  term  may  simply  designate  the  payment  of 
interest.  It  may,  however,  have  the  meaning  “to  increase  to  the  double  amount.”  Cf.  Code  of  Hammurabi,  § 101; 
124.  The  sign  may,  of  course,  also  stand  for  sand,  Br.  3370,  See  Chapter  IX, 

4 For  ii-ru,  cf,  U-RA  — labirtu , Br.  1435, 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


59 


3.  d En-lil-ld-al-sa{g)1 

4.  dumu  Lugal-nanga-su 

5.  Ur-dPA.KU  dumu  Ka-ka-ge 

6.  in-si-sa(m )2 

7.  igi  Ur-dDumu-zi(d)-[d]a 

8.  di-kud  lugal-k[a‘?]-su 

9.  [i]n(?)-[pa(d)?] 

10.  i\giO)]  [A]b(T)-gi[ 

11.  mu  lugal-bi  [in-pa (d)] 

12.  Y Lugal-itu-Da3 


13.  Y Lugal-[ ] 

14.  Y[ ] 

15-20.  [ ] 

21.  [Y]  Ur-dDa-m[u ] 

22.  [Y]  Ur-[  ] 


23 . galu-en im-ma-b i-me 

24.  itu  Se-kin-kud 

25.  mu  dNanna  Kar-zi(d)-[d]a 

26.  a-du  Il-kam-ma-su 

27.  E-a-na  ba-an-tu(r ) 


for  En-lil-al-sdg , 
son  of  Lugal-nanga, 

Ur-Nusku,  son  of  Ka-ka, 
has  bought. 

Before  Ur-Dumu-zi, 
judge  of  the  king, 
they  have  sworn  (?). 

Before  Ab-gi  [ . . . ] 

by  the  name  of  the  king  they  swore. 

Y Lugal-itu  Da, 

Y Lugal  [ ], 

Y [ ], 

[ ], 

[Y]  Ur-Da-m[u ], 

[Y]  Ur-[ ], 

witnesses. 

Month  Se-kin-kud. 

year  (when  he)  brought  Nanna  of 
Kar-zidda 
into  his  temple 
for  the  second  time. 


VIII. 

(Text,  PL  9,  No.  15.) 

Purchase  of  a Male  Slave. 

The  commercial  agent  Ur-Nusku  has  bought  a male  slave  for  Ur-e-lugalani, 
the  price  being  11  sekel  of  silver. 

1.  / sag-iir 4 \mu-n]i  LUM 5 1 male  slave,  his  name  is  called  (?) 

1 al-sd(g ) could  possibly  be  a title,  but  also  a part  of  the  name,  “Enlil  is  the  gracious  protector.”  Cf.  Ur-sag- 
ga-al,  P.  K.  U.  N .,  p.  666. 

2 For  the  reading  sa(m),  or  sa-a,  see  M.  3235. 

3 Cf.  No.  13  (IV)  : 13. 

4 1 sag,  “one  head,”  cf.  A.  B.  P.,  Nos.  1-5. 

5 The  sign  is  LUM,  but  this  sign  is  interchanged  with  LAM,  A.  V.  2611,  and  ref.,  and  often  in  this  period  with 
NUM.  See  especially  the  date  formula  for  the  3d  year  of  Gimil-Sin,  p.  24.  Here  it  may  denote  a verb  or  be  a part 
of  the  name  of  the  slave.  LUM  as  well  as  LAM  is  also  equal  to  un-nu-bu,  us-su-bu,  A.  V.  2611,  Br.  11186-11188,  which 
Haupt,  Hebraica,  I,  p.  219,  derives  from  a stem  andbu,  “to  spring,”  hence  annabu,  “a  hare,”  “a  jumper,  springer,” 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


GO 

[Luga]l-I  Ml 

2.  XI  gin  azag-ud-su 

3 . Ur-E-lugal-a-ni-su 

4.  Ur-PA.KU  dam-kar 

5.  in-si-sa[(m )]2 

6.  igi  Gii-de-a  MU -e-dub 3 

7.  igi  S[u-du](g)-ga-zi(d)-da  is-ku 4 

8-15.  [ ] 

1 6 . gal u-en  i m- ma-b  i-me 

17.  itu  Azag-sim  ud  X-lal-I 

ni-la 5 

18.  mu  d Bur-d En-zu-ge 

19.  Ur-bil-lumkl  mu-hul-a 


1 Aigal- Ra  m man, 
for  11  sekel  of  silver, 
on  behalf  of  Ur-E-lugal-ani, 

Ur-Nusku,  the  agent, 
has  bought. 

Before  Gudea,  the  MU -official  of  the 
tablet  house 

before  Su-du(g)  ga-zidda,  the  is-ku- 
priest. 

witnesses. 

In  the  month  Azag-sim,  on  the  9th  day, 
he  shall  pay. 

Year  when  Bur-Sin  devastated 
Urbillum. 


IX. 

(Text,  PI.  1),  No.  1(5.) 

Sale  of  a Pair  of  Slaves. 

Gimd-Tammuz  acknowledges  the  receipt  from  Azidda  of  one  rnana  of  silver, 
being  the  payment  for  a pair  of  slaves.  The  document  was  enclosed  in  an  envelope. 

1.  I ma-na  azag-ud  1 maria  of  silver, 

2.  azag 6 nam-galu-tab-ba-su7  the  purchase  money  for  a slave  pair, 

3.  ki  A-zi(d)-da-ta  from  A-zidda, 


Muss-Arnolt,  p.  68 b.  NUM,  NIM,  Br.  9011,  is  equal  to  samA,  read  enim,  Br.  9017.  This  sign  also  represents  gir-ru, 
C.  T . , XII,  30a;  XIV,  1,  3a,  which  may  denote  “a  runner.”  Moreover  it  stands  for  saku,  which  denotes  some  kind 
of  servant,  “cupbearer,”  etc.,  of  which  amelurab  sakA  is  the  head.  See  Muss-Arnolt,  p.  10996.  The  LUM  may  thus 
be  a verb,  referring  to  mu-ni,  or  a part  of  the  name  of  the  slave.  Possibly  LUM  might  also  have  the  reading  I M , 
mu-ni-im,  “his  name.”  See  Chapter  IX. 

1 Or  Galu-IM.  If  LUM  belongs  to  the  name,  Girru(l)-lugal(galu)-IM. 

2Cf.  No.  VII:  6. 

3 See  Chapter  IX. 

4 See  Chapter  IX. 

5 Cf.  Nos.  11  (V);  16;  13  (VI);  5. 

s Here  azag  is  equivalent  to  sa{m),  “purchase  money.” 

7 NAM.GALU  = amelutu , Br.  2200,  i.e.,  the  human  race,  but  it  is  also  used  as  collective  for  slaves,  servants. 
See  Muss-Arnolt,  p.  576.  TAB-ba  = esepu,  Br.  3762,  “to  increase,  double,”  also  sanA,  Br.  3770,  “to  double,”  hence 
here  nam-galu-tab-ba  is  literally  “a  double  slave-ship,  a slave  pair.” 


PROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


61 


4.  Su-dDumu-zi 

5.  su-ba-ti 

6.  Y A-ab-gal-mu 1 

7.  Y Ur-dDun-pa-e 

8.  Y Galu-dEn-lil-ld 

9.  Y (%r-[n]z-scR/ 

10.  Y Ses-Da-da 

1 1 . Galu-e n im- ma-b  i-nie 

12.  itu  Gu(d)-si-[z]u 

13.  mu  dI-bi-dEn-zu 

lugal 

X. 

(Text,  PL  11, 

Receipt  for 

Gir-ili-sag  acknowledges  the  receipt  of 
as  a loan,  on  which  he  is  to  pay  an  interest 
of  twenty  per  cent. 

1.  ^ ma-na  azag-ud 

2.  mas 2 V gin  I gin-ta3 

3.  ki  Ur-d  Dun-pa- e-ta 

4 . [Gi]r-i-li-s a (g) 

5.  [. su-ba-ti ] 

6.  itu  Gdn-gdn-e 

7.  muendInnanna  Unu(g)kl 

8.  md[s-e  ni-pa(d)Y 


Gimil-T ammuz 
has  received. 

Ab-gal-mu(?) , 

Ur-Dun-pa-e, 

Galu-Enlil, 

Gir-ni-sag, 

Ses-Da-da, 

witnesses. 

Month  Gu(d)-si-zu, 
year  Ibl-Sin  (became) 
king. 

No.  22.) 

a Loan. 

half  a rnana  of  silver  from  Ur-Dun-pa-e 
of  one  sekel  for  five  sekel,  or  at  the  rate 

\ mana  of  silver, 
interest  1 sekel  for  5 sekel, 
from  Ur-Dun-pa-e, 

Gir-ili-sdg 
has  received. 

Month  Gdn-gdn-e, 

year  the  high  priest  of  Innanna  of  Erech 
appointed. 


XI. 

(Text,  PL  12,  No.  23;  Halit.,  Plate  V,  Nos.  17,  18.) 

Receipt  for  a Loan. 

Isme-ilu  acknowledges  the  receipt  of  three  gar  of  grain  from  Ur-Dun-pa-e  as 


1 MU  may  be  a title,  i.e.,  “baker.”  Cf.  also  MU-c-dub,  No.  15  (VIII):  9.  It  may  also  belong  to  the  name. 

2 MAS  = siptu,  Br.  2029,  from  escpu,  “to  gather,  add,  increase,”  hence  increase,  interest.  See  Muss-Arnoll, 
p.  67a.  Cf.  HAR,  No.  XI,  1. 

3 Literally  “Interest  5 gin  1 gin  according.” 

4 The  envelope  has  mu  en  dInnanna  Unu(g)ki  mds-e  ib-\jpa(d)'\. 


62 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  11.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


a loan,  on  which  he  is  to  pay  ail  interest  of  90  qa  to  a gur  (300  qa),  or  at  the  rate 
ot  more  than  30  per  cent.  Ur-Dun-pa-e  transacts  another  loan  to  another  person 
on  the  same  day.1 


1.  Ill  se-gur  ha[r-su ]2 

2.  mas  l gur  XC-ta 

3.  ki  Ur-  Dun-pa- 

4.  e-la 

5.  Is-me-ilu 3 

6.  su-ba-ti 

7.  itu  Engar-du-a 

8.  ud  XlX-ba-ni 

9.  mu  Si-mu-ru-umk 

ba-hul 


3 gur  corn  at  interest, 
interest  for  1 gur  90  (qa) 
f rom  Ur- Du  n- pa-e 

Isme-ilu 
has  received. 

Month  Engar  du-a, 
day  19th, 
year  S imurum 
devastated. 


XII. 

(Text,  PI.  12,  No.  24.) 

Receipt  for  a Loan. 

A-bilalum  acknowledges  the  receipt  of  ten  gur  of  corn  from  Ur-Dun-pa-e  as 
a loan,  on  which  he  agrees  to  pay  an  interest  of  90  qa  to  a gur,  or  at  the  rate  of  more 
than  30  per  cent. 

1.  X se-gur  har-sii 4 

2.  mas  I gur  XC-ta 

3.  ki  Ur-d Dun-pa-e- 

ta 

4.  A-bil-la-lum 

5.  su-ba-ti 

6.  itu  Engar-du-a 

7.  ud  XlX-ba-ni 

8.  mu  Si-mu-ru-um 1 

ba-hul 

1 See  next  document  translated. 

2 QAR-su,  as  emended  from  No.  24  (XII) : 1,  may  be  taken  as  ana  Jvubulli,  cf.  Br.  8530,  “ar  interest,”  thus  refer- 
ring to  the  nature  of  the  loan  transaction,  or  it  may  be  taken  as  ana  akali,  "for  food,”  stating  the  object  of  the  loan, 
as  often  is  the  case. 

3 The  name  is  no  doubt  Semitic. 

4 Cf.  No.  23  (XI):  1,  as  emended  in  analogy  with  this  tablet. 


10  gur  corn  at  interest, 
interest  (for)  1 gur  90  qa, 
from  Ur-Dun-pa-e, 

A-bil-la-lum 
has  received. 

Month  Engar-du-a , 
day  19th, 
year  S imurum 
devastated. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


63 


XIII. 

(Text,  PI.  13,  No.  29;  Halit.,  Plate  V,  Nos.  17,  IS.) 

Receipt  for  Silver.1 

A-zidda  acknowledges  the  receipt  of  one  sekel  of  silver  from  Lugal-N amtar . 


1 sekel  of  silver, 
from  Lugal-N  amtar, 

A-zidda 
has  received. 

Month  Se-kin-kud, 
year  the  high  priest  of  the 
great  abode  of  Innanna  appointed. 

XIV. 

(Text,  PI.  10,  No.  41.) 

Receipt  for  Grain. 

Lugcd-N amtar  acknowledges  the  receipt  of  twenty  gar  of  grain  for  cattle  feed 
from  Ur-Azag-sim.2 


1.  I gin  azag-ud 

2.  ki  Lugal-N  am-tar- 

ri.-ta 

3.  A-zi(d)-da 

4.  su-ba-ti 

5.  itu  Se-kin-kud 

6.  mu  en-am-gal 

7.  dlnnanna  ba-tug 


1.  XX  se-gur 

2.  sa(g)-gal  amar-ra 3 

3.  ki  Ur-d Azag-sim-ta 

4.  Lugal-N am-tar-ri 

5.  su-ba-ti 

6.  club  Galu-d En-zu 

7.  itu  Ab-e 

8.  mu  en-am-gal  An-na 

9.  end Innanna  ba-tug 


20  cgur  of  corn, 
feed  for  young  cattle, 
from  Azag-sim 
Lugal-N  amtar 
has  received. 

Account  of  Amel-Sin. 

Month  Ab-e, 

year  the  high  priest  of  Ana, 
high  priest  of  Innanna  appointed. 


XV. 


(Text,  PI.  27,  No.  75;  Halft.,  Plate  VI,  Nos.  23,  24.) 


Account  of  a Date  Harvest. 


This  tablet  is  unique  both  in  regard  to  make-up  and  contents.  It  supplies 

1 Probably  also  a loan,  but  without  a statement  as  to  the  interest  to  be  paid.  Still  it  may  also  be  only  a receipt. 

2 Note  the  transaction  recorded  in  previous  document  in  regard  to  the  same  man. 


64 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


an  excellent  illustration  of  the  queer  and  laborious,  but  exceedingly  exact  and 
painstaking  methods  of  classification  employed  by  the  Babylonian  account  makers. 
It  is  an  account  or  report  in  regard  to  the  results  of  the  harvest  of  a palm  grove, 
stating : 

1.  Number  of  date  palms  yielding  a certain  amount  of  dates  each. 

2.  Number  of  date  palms  from  which  the  dates  had  already  been  taken  away 
or  plundered. 

3.  Total  number  of  date  palms,  from  which  dates  had  been  gathered. 

4.  Total  of  date  palms  plundered. 

5.  Total  amount  of  dates  gathered. 


VII  9i*hgisimmarl  I gv[r-laj 


7 date  palms  at  1 gu[r  each]. 


o 

U gisha 

CCXL-ta 

2 trees 

240  (qa)  e[ach]. 

3. 

XII  aish 

C LX  XX 

12  trees 

180 

4. 

XVI gish 

CL 

16  trees 

150 

5. 

XXIV  gish 

exx 

24  trees 

1.20 

6. 

XXI  gish 

xc 

21  trees 

90 

7. 

XXII  gish 

LX  XX 

22  trees 

80 

8. 

XXVII  gish 

LX 

27  trees ........ 

60 

9. 

J/~  gish 

L 

5 trees 

50 

10. 

~y  gish 

XL 

5 trees 

40 

1 1. 

XX[II]  gish 

XXX 

2[2]  trees 

30 

12. 

gishA 

XXV 

trees 

25 

13. 

XXII  gish 

XX 

22  trees 

20 

14. 

XIV  gish 

X 

14  trees 

10 

15.  XL  rjisimmar  ka-lum  sir 

16.  sunigin  CXC  oishgisimmar 

tig-a? 


40  date  palms,  the  dates  taken  away. 
Total : 190  date  palms 
harvested, 


1 The  fruit  gathered  is  ka-lum,  dates,  lienee  °is,lgi$immar  must  signify  date  palms. 

2 Ta  restored  after  the  remaining  part  of  la  at  the  end  of  line  2. 

3 Of  course  gi)  is  only  the  determinative,  but  I have  translated  “trees’’  as  a matter  ot  convenience,  to  mark  the 
mode  of  abbreviation  employed  by  scribe. 

4 Numeral  is  wanting,  but  according  to  the  amount  of  fruit  gathered  the  numeral  I ought  to  be  inserted,  or 
it  may  be  simply  understood. 

5 BU  must  here  designate  na.s  i hit,  “to  tear  out,  take  away,  remove,”  Br.  7528,  and  hence  it  could  also  be  read  gid 
and  bur.  No  doubt  this  term  designates  the  fact  that  the  dates  of  these  40  palms  had  already  been  harvested  or  plun- 
dered. In  any  case  these  40  trees  stand  in  opposition  to  the  190  trees  from  which  the  dates  are  now  gathered. 

0 TIG-u  is  no  doubt  a verb  form  with  the  meaning  of  pah'iru,  “to  gather  together.”  Cl.  Br.  3220,  3222.  Thus 
the  term  would  denote  harvesting,  or  the  gathering  of  dates  from  these  palm  trees,  in  contrast  to  the  40,  which  had  no 
fruit. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


65 


17.  sunigin  XL  9ishgisimmar  sir 

18.  sunigin  LIV  C[LXXX  ka-lu]m  [gu]r 

19.  itu  Su-[kul  ....  b]a-ni 

20.  mu  ma-d[a  Za-ab-s]a-li 

[k‘b]a-hul 


Total:  40  date  palms  plundered. 
Total:  44  gur  180  (qa)  of  dates. 
Month  Su-kul,  day  [....]  th. 
Year  the  co[untry  of  Zabs]ali 
[devastated. 


XVI. 

(Text,  PI.  29,  No.  77.) 

Inventory. 

A list  of  implements,  tools,  furniture,  skins,  cattle,  articles  of  food,  etc.,  being 
the  property  of  Sarrum-ili  of  the  city  of  -Basime. 


1.  XLIV  aishg  id-da1 

2.  V gishku-ma-ru 2 

3.  Ill  gishna-ba-tum3 

4.  VII  °ishga-am-lu 4 

5.  XIII  aishdubbin  kes-da 5 

6.  XII  9ilsh]PA-us-sa 0 

7.  I gu(d)-9ishPA 1 

8.  IV  uz  [V]II  mas-us 

9.  IV  [ . . . ]-us8 

10.  Ill  gas  ni-gis 9 

11.  V gas  ni-nun 

12.  I gas-tur  ni-nun 


44  wooden  g id-da, 

5 wooden  ku-ma-ru, 

3 wooden  nabatum, 

7 wooden  gamlu, 

13  wooden  dubbin-kes-da, 

12  wooden  staffs  (?),  second  size  (?), 
1 ox  goad(?), 

4 goats,  7 male  lambs, 

9 male  . . . , 

3 gas  of  wood  oil, 

5 gas  of  butter, 

1 small  gas  of  butter, 


1 GIS.GID.DA  means  really  long  or  heavy  wood,  or  rather  something  made  of  wood,  long  or  heavy,  cf.  Br. 
7511,  7518,  but  it  is  no  doubt  here  some  special  object  or  implement  made  of  wood.  Cf.  the  sehu,  Br.  7584.  See  also 
Z.  A.  VIII,  p.  77,  urudu  $un-ka)-lum  — si-i-Jiu,  weapon  or  instrument. 

2 gishj^u  _ Br.  10529. 

3 Seems  to  be  Semitic  word.  Cf.  nibittu,  “rope,  fetter,  bond.” 

4 Also  Semitic;  no  doubt  some  instrument,  implement  or  weapon.  See  Muss-Arnolt,  p.  221. 

5 DUBBIN  = sapdru,  Br.  2714,  “be  sharp,”  hence  sip-ri  tar-ta-hi,  “sharp  tools,  or  points  of  spears,”  see  Muss- 
Arnolt,  p.  886.  It  might  also  come  from  galabu,  Br.  2710,  2711,  2724,  2725,  2727,  “make  a mark,  whip,”  and  also 
masaru,  Br.  2716,  “send,  drive,”  hence  perhaps  a “whip.”  It  might  also  stand  for  sumbu,  Br.  2716,  “wagon,  freight 
wagon,”  see  Muss-Arnolt,  881.  KES-da  = rakdsu,  Br.  4331,  “bind,”  sardfiu,  Br.  4333,  “excite”;  su-up-pu-ru,  Br. 
4334,  “sharp  points;”  also  tarddu,  “hunt,  drive,”  Br.  4344,  which  also  points  to  the  meaning  of  whip,  “wagon  whips.” 
“team  whips.” 

6 GIS.PA  = fiattu,  “staff,  scepter,”  Br.  5573.  US-sa  means  next,  perhaps  next  in  size  to  the  regular  ones. 

7 Literally  “ox  staff.” 

8 Perhaps  gu(d)-us,  “male,  t.e.,  virile  oxen,  bulls.” 

9 GAS  seems  to  be  a measure  or  jar.  NI.GIS  wood  oil,  sesam. 

9 


66  SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS, 

II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 

13.  I su-gu(d) 

1 ox  hide, 

14.  \ AN  .DAH.StJM 

i AN.DAH.StJM, 

15.  LX XXV I si-KAbi 

86  si  of  KAB 

16.  XXX-lal-I  su-hd 

29  hides, 

17.  I su  dug -g an2 

1 good(?)  hide, 

18.  II  9ishbansur-gis 

2 wooden  tables. 

19.  [ . . .]  [d]ir  ma-dub 3 

Account  of  the 

20.  nig-ga  Sar-ru-um-i-li 

property  of  Sarrum-ih 

21.  sa(g)  Ba-si-mekl  ni-gdl 

in  the  city  of  Basime. 

XVII. 

(Text,  PI.  31,  No.  79;  Halft.,  PI.  VIII,  Nos.  27,  28.) 

Account  of  Cattle  Herds. 

A specific  account  given  of  four  different  herds  of  large  and  small  cattle, 
entrusted  to  the  keeping  of  Ur-d Dun-pa-e,  the  son  of  Ur-Ramman. 

1 . I dbl  amar  ru-a 5 1 cow  calf  (new)  born, 

2.  II  ab-amar-na{d)-a 6 2 cow  calves  of  the  fold, 

3.  IV  db-al  4 full  grown  cows, 

1 SI  = karnu,  “horn,”  also  malu,  “fill,”  “amount.”  KAB,  gub,  jtiibl  = sumelul  “left  horns”? 

2 The  sign  H.I , read  dug,  may  possibly  be  cib.  GAN  may  stand  for  gd.  Cf.  Br.  8261. 

3 Of  the  sign  that  probably  stood  at  the  beginning  of  the  line  only  traces  of  a vertical  or  slanting  wedge  can  be 
distinguished.  The  following  sign,  SI,  is  not  very  clear,  but  on  account  of  the  following  .4,  I am  inclined  to  read  the 
two  signs  dir.  Besides  malu  and  atom,  which  perhaps  do  not  fit  so  well  in  this  connection,  dir  also  stands  for  afoazu, 
Br.  3724,  and  asdhu,  Br.  3725,  which  is  a synonym  of  asdru,  i.e.,  “to  bind,  enclose.”  The  IM.Gl.A  — e-si-ri  sa-duppi, 
II  R.,  48,  40,  must  signify  the  making  up  of  a document;  IM,  read  imi,  standing  for  duppu,  Br.  8360.  Cf. 
SAM.SEBIR.AB.MU.SAR  = uz-zu-uh-tu,  A.  V.  2622,  Br.  8851. 

The  dir  ma-dub  may  thus  be  an  equivalent  of  esiri  duppi,  and  signify  the  making  up  of  a document.  The  md- 
dub,  generally  written  md-dub-ba,  really  signifies  some  kind  of  receptable  of  a tablet.  It  could  possibly,  among  other 
things,  be  applied  to  the  envelope  or  case  of  a tablet.  The  phrase  sometimes  apparently  is  employed  to  signify  an  office 
equal  to  the  dub-sar.  See  Chapter  IX. 

4 That  the  Sumerian  of  the  sign,  usually  given  the  value  of  LID,  is  to  be  read  db,  cf.  Br.  8865,  is  clearly  shown 
by  the  gloss  to  “LID” .GU(D).gI.A,  bb-ba-gu(d)-ha-a,  R.  M.  A.,  PI.  25,  No.  103,  O.  11. 

5 KAK-a  = band,  Br.  5298,  is  most  likely  to  be  considered  as  a synonymous  term  for  tu(d)-da,  lines  21,  23  and 
30,  which  must  stand  for  some  form  of  alddu,  and  would  then  denote  a (new)  born  calf,  as  a careful  distinction  always 
was  made  as  to  the  age  of  cattle.  Here  the  ru-a  calves  are  distinguished  from  the  na(d)-a  calves,  see  next  line.  See 
also  KAK. KAK-a  = kalamu,  Br.  5286,  denoting  mar  or  young  offspring,  especially  of  lambs;  but  the  term  can,  of 
course,  be  applied  to  other  animals.  See  Z.  A.,  IV,  p.  266;  Muss-Amolt,  p.  389.  Of  course,  the  term  may  also  come 
from  le-u,  Br.  5257,  “be  strong”;  pakadu,  Br.  5263,  “given  in  keeping”;  nadu,  Br.  52,  “deposited,”  etc. 

9 NA(D)  = rabasu,  na’alu,  etc.,  with  the  meaning  “to  lie  down,  to  rest,”  hence  couch,  but  here  it  must  stand 
for  rubsu,  Br.  8998,  a place  of  rest  and  shelter,  hence  the  fold.  Calves  of  the  fold  would  be  those  that  still  were  kept 
in  special  care,  not  being  developed  enough  to  go  with  the  herd.  Cf,  “lamb  of  the  fold,”  line  19, 


67 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


4. 

XI  gu(d)-gis 

11  bulls, 

5. 

I ab-mu-III 

5 cows  3 years  (old), 

6. 

I db-mu-11 

1 cow  2 years  (old), 

7. 

III  db-mu-I 

3 cows  1 year  (old), 

8. 

II  gu{d)-mu-I 

2 oxen  1 year  (old), 

9. 

XXVIII  gu(d)-db-hd 1 

28  cattle, 

10. 

gir  A-a-du-n[a(d )] 

gir-officer  A a-d'u-na(d) . 

11. 

XXIV  ganam 

24  sheep, 

12. 

CCLXVIII  udu-us 

268  virile  sheep, 

13. 

XX  sal-sil-uz 2 

20  female  kid  goats, 

14. 

XXIII  mas-gal 3 

young  ones  grown  up, 

15. 

mds-us 

15  male  offspring, 

16. 

CCCXL  udu-mds-hd 

340  sheep  (and)  lambs, 

17. 

ki  Ur-zag-e 

from  (with)  Ur-zage. 

18. 

CLIV  ganam 

154  sheep, 

19. 

sa{g)-ba  X ganam-sil-na(dy 

among  them  10  lambs  of  the  fold 

20. 

in-gub 

are 

21. 

CXXXV  sil  tu(d)-da 5 

135  young  ones  born. 

22. 

XLVIII  uz 

48  goats, 

23. 

XLV‘  7nas-tu(d)-da 7 

45  (46?)  young  ones  born, 

24. 

CCCLXXXII  udu-uz-mds- 

382  young  ones  of 

hd 

sheep  and  goats 

25. 

ki  Da-bi-a 

from  (with)  Dabia. 

26. 

XLII  ganam 

42  sheep, 

27. 

VII  udu-us 

7 virile  sheep, 

28. 

LVIII  sal-sil-[u]z 

58  female  kid  goats, 

29. 

XLI  sil-us-uz 

41  male  kid  goats, 

30. 

XXXVIII  sil-tu(d)-das 

38  young  ones  born 

31. 

III  uz 

3 goats, 

1 That  QI-A  is  to  be  read  fed  is  seen  from  the  gloss,  C.  T.,  XXV,  20a,  2;  R.  M . A.,  PL  28,  No.  103,  O.  11. 

2 For  the  reading  sil  see  J.  R.  A.  S.,  1905,  p.  144,  cuneiform  text,  line  8. 

3 MAS  = urisu,  i.e.,  offspring,  young  ones,  both  of  sheep  and  goats,  hence  may  denote  both  kids  and  lambs. 
See  Muss-Arnolt,  p.  1046. 

4 Cf.  line  2. 

5 TU(D)-da  (see  also  lines  23  and  30)  must  probably  be  taken  in  the  meaning  of  aladu,  Br.  1070.  Cf.  the  term 
rd-a,  line  1. 

6 Mav  be  XLVI. 

7 Cf.  lines  21  and  30. 

8 Cf.  lines  21  and  23. 


68 

32.  XIII  sal-AS.KAR 1 

33.  CCII  udu-uz-mas-ha 

34.  hi  A-bil-lum-ma 

35.  sunigin  XXVIII  gu(d)-ab-ha 

36.  sunigin 2 udu-ha 

37.  sunigin  CXXXVIII  uz-mas-ha 

38.  si(U)-la  Ur-d  Dun-pa-e 

dumu  Ur-dIM3 


II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 

13  sucklings. 

202  lambs  (and)  kids, 
from  (with)  A-bdlum. 

Total : 28  large  cattle, 

Total : sheep, 

Total:  138  kids, 
in  the  keeping ( ?)  of  Ur-pa-e, 
son  of  Ur-Rammdn. 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS 


XVIII. 


(Text,  PI.  37,  No.  90.) 


Cost  of  Cultivation  of  Fields. 

Statement  of  the  amount  of  grain  required  for  wages,  or  sustenance  of  slaves, 
employed  in  the  cultivation  of  certain  fields. 

1.  I tV  tV  g°n  sag-did  725  (. sar ) of  land,  the  labor  cost  of 


2.  ai-diP  XX  sar-ta 

3.  ci-kal  I CCXLVI  qa-ta 7 

4.  d-bi  XXX  VI  XV  gin 

5.  kal  ud-l-su 

6.  se-bi  CCXVII  \ qas 

7.  -jJg  gan  al 9 VI  sar-ta 


tilling; 
for  20  sar 

wages  of  slaves  1 (pur)  246  qa, 
the  wages  30  (gur)  6 (qa)  15  gin 
for  slaves  per  day, 
the  grain  2174  qa. 

100  (sar)  land  cultivated;  for  6 sar 


1 In  later  Babylonian  and  Assyrian  SU.KAR  = uneku,  Br.  10980. 

2 As  the  numerals  now  stand  in  the  text,  cf.  Halftone  Reproductions,  the  sum  total  according  to  the  values  of 
numerals  hi  corresponding  positions  given  by  Hilprecht,  B.  E.,  XX,  p.  26,  would  be  3600  + 600  + 3 X 60  + 6 = 
4.550.  But  this  is  altogether  too  high,  as  can  be  seen  by  adding  together  the  number  of  animals  specified. 

3 SI. LA  may  stand  for  SI. LA  = pukudu,  Br.  3467,  written  phonetically,  cf.  ni-la  for  ni-ld,  Nos.  11  (V)  : 16; 
13  (VI)  : 15;  15  (VIII)  : 17.  But  it  is  not  quite  certain  that  the  sign  is  SI.  It  may  be  SU  + NIGtN,  the  wedges  in 
front  being  indistinct.  If  such  is  the  case,  the  la  would,  of  course,  be  the  overhanging  vowel  and  would  prove  that 
the  composite  sign,  generally  read  sunigin,  will  have  to  be  read  sukil. 

4 That  is  600  + 100  + 25  sar. 

5 SAG  = restu  in  the  phrase  resti  kisri,  meaning  the  payment  of  rent,  B.  E.,  VI1,  33  (8)  : 10;  47  (A.  R.  U ,,  II, 
18)  : 10 ; 49  {A.  R.  U .,  II,  19)  : 11.  In  analogy  with  this  SAG.KAK  would  then  here  express  resti  zikpi  or  resti  epsi, 
“payment,  cost  of  cultivation.”  SAG  might  also  be  explained  as  referring  to  the  slaves  employed  for  the  tilling  of 
these  fields,  hence  SAG.KAK  might  mean  something  like  “slave-labor.”  Cf.  nmclu  KAK  = amelubanu,  M.  3608. 

6 Cf.  al-ag,  line  30.  AL  prefixed  to  the  verb  has  the  force  of  the  permansive.  Cf.  the  phrases  AL.BAD,  “being 
completed,”  AL.DUG,  “being  satisfied,”  A.  B.  P.,  2,  10,  11,  etc.  GAN  AL.DU  = eklu  zikpu  or  eklu  epsu,  “field 
under  cultivation.” 

7 For  a different  way  of  calculating  cost  of  cultivation  see  0.  B.  T.  R.,  254,  6,  7. 

8 Here  we  would  expect  a grand  total  given,  but  this  comparatively  small  amount  must  denote  a ratio  of  the  cost. 

9 KAK  = du  omitted. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


69 


8.  d-bi  X VI  | kal  ud  I-su 

9.  se-bi  XC 

10.  Lagab  +sig  durnu  dumu  A-a-bi 

11.  T2g  y1 2 gaii  al  VI  sar-ta 

12.  d-bi  XL  LX  \ kal  ud  I-su 

13.  se-bi  CCI 

14.  ^ TV  gan  al-du  X [ + sar-t]a 

15.  d-bi  X kal  ud  [I-su] 

16.  se-bi  LX  [ . . .?] 

17.  [ . . . ]-ba-lul-ge  [....] 

18.  T2g-  gan  al-[du  . . . . ] 

19.  sar-t[a] 

20.  d-bi  XXX  III  i kal  [ud  I-su] 

21.  s[e-b]i  [ ] 

22-29.  [ ] 

30.  [ . . . . ] gan  al-ag  a-sa(g) [gab-.  .] 

dA[ma?]-dKA1 

31.  [mu  dSu-dEn-zu  l]ugal-[e  ma~] 

da  Za-a)b-sa-lil- 
m[u-hul] 


the  wages  10  (gur)  6§  qa,  for  slaves 
per  day, 
the  grain  is  90, 

Lagab-sig  the  son-son  of  A-a-bi. 

225  ( sar ) land  cultivated  for  6 sar 
the  wages  40  ( gur ) 60§  (qa),  for  slaves 
per  day 

the  grain  is  201. 

125  (sar)  land  cultivated;  for  10  + ? sar 
the  wages  10  (gur)  for  slaves  per  day, 
the  grain  60. 

[ ] 

200  (sar)  land  cultivated ; 
for  sar 

the  wages  30  (gur)  3^  qa  for  slaves 
per  day 

the  grain  [ ] 


i . . . . ] land  cultivation  of  field 

[ 1 

year  Gimil-Sin,  the  king, 
devastated  the  country 
of  Zabsali. 


XIX. 

(Text,  PI.  39,  No.  92;  Halit.,  PI.  IX,  Nos.  29,  30.) 

Field  Account. 

An  account  of  the  amount  of  grain  required  for  seed  and  the  feed  of  oxen  at 
the  cultivation  of  different  fields. 


1.  I 3 gem  ab-nam-bi3  1 gan  50  sar  of  land;  its  cultivation, 

1 Of.  O.  B.  T.  R„  254. 

2 That  is  1 gan  + 600  + 300  + 50  sar  = ll  gan  50  sar. 

3 AB  = erehi,  cf.  Br.  3819,  also  nasetku,  of.  Br.  3820,  “to  place,  appoint,”  but  also  “to  do,  perform,”  and  thus 
= epesu.  NAM =sdmu,  Br.  2103,  also  “to  place,  settle,  fix,”  see  M uss-A rrwlt , p.  701.  AB.NAM  is  equal  to  AB.ENGAR. 
line  15.  Cf.  ameluAB  = ameluir-ri-$Ui  Br.  3819;  ameluAB  = ameluna-si-ku,  Br.  3820.  Hence  the  term  AB.NAM  and 
AB.ENGAR  must  stand  for  farming. 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


70 

2.  I gar 1 VIII  \-a-an 2 

3.  se-kul-bi  I XXIX  4 qa  V gin 

lu  gal 

4.  Ill  -3  T8g3  gan  ab-nam-bi 

5.  I gar  X-lal  I-ta-a-an  ni-gal 

6.  se-bi  III  XXXVIII  qa-gur 

7.  har-gu(d)-bi  II  LXVII1  § qa 

8.  VII  y gin-gur 

9.  sunigin  se-bi  VI  CCVI  I qa 
10.  II  4 gin  se-kul  har-gu(d) 

1 1.  Za-la-lum  engar 

12.  / § T\-  gan  ab-nam-bi 

13.  I gar  VIII  4 a-an  ni-gal 

14.  se-bi  4 XXX III  y'j  qa-gur 

15.  II  | gan  ab-engar-b[i] 

10.  / gar  X-lal- I-ta-a-an  ni-gal 

17.  se-bi  II  CXX  4 gur 

18.  har-gu(d)-bi  I CCLXXI  § qa-gur 

19.  s[unigin  se-b]i  V CCLXXV  qa-gur 

20.  s[e-ku]l  har-gu(d ) 


21.  [ en]gar 

22.  [ a]b-nam  I gar 

23.  [.......  ] ni-gal 

24.  [ q]a  XV  gin 

25.  ha[r q]a  VII Ik  gi[n]~ 

gur 

26.  [ ] qa  Ilk  gin 

27.  [ 

28.  [ ] 

29.  [ ] kiba-hul 


for  1 gar  according  to  84, 
the  seed  is  1 (gur)  29|  qa  5 gin 
royal, 

3^  gan  of  land ; its  cultivation, 
for  1 gar  9 (qa), 
the  grain  is  3 gur  38  qa, 
feed  for  oxen,  2 gur  68 § qa, 

74  gin, 

Total:  its  grain  6 gur  206-g-  qa, 

24  gin  for  seed  and  feed. 

Za-la-lum,  farmer. 

1 gan  1400  sar  of  land;  its  cultivation, 
for  1 gar  8y  (qa), 

the  grain  is  4 gur  3 2 qa. 

2 gan  1400  sar  of  land;  its  cultivation, 
for  1 gar  9 (qa) 

the  grain  is  2 gur  1204  qa, 
feed  for  oxen,  1 gur  271  § qa. 

Total:  the  amount  of  grain  is  5 gur 
275  qa, 

for  seed  and  feed. 

[ 3 

[ 3 

[ • 3 

[ 3 

[ 3 

[ 3 

[ 3 

[ 3 

[ 3 

[ ] devastated. 


XX. 

(Text,  P],  55,  No.  120;  Halft,,  PI.  XII,  Nos.  39,  40.) 

Expenditure  for  Drink. 

An  account  of  expenditure  of  grain  for  drink  to  a number  of  men. 


1 For  gar  as  a measure  of  area  see  B.  E.,  VI1,  44,  1;  60,  6. 

2 Cf.  ta-a-an,  line  5.  3 That  is  3 gan  + 600  + 300  sar  = 3J  gan. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


71 


4.  Ill  qa  Ri-pi-pi  dub-sar 

5.  V qa  a-du  II-kam-ma-as 

6.  gir  A-dug-ga 

7.  V qa  gas  gir  Lugal-sirim 

8.  dumu  Hal-hal-la 

9.  V qa  er-su 

10.  A-dug-ga 

11.  sunigin  XXVIII  qa  se 

12.  ba-zi 

13.  sa(g)  In-sik,-na 

14.  gir  A-dug-ga 


1.  V qa  s[e-g]as 

2.  gir  Ur-dEn-ki  gin 1 


3.  V qa  gas  A-dug-ga 2 


5 qa  grain  (for)  drink, 
t/w-officer  Arad-Ea  (for)  journey, 
5 qa  drink  (to)  A-dug-ga , 

3 qa  (to)  Ri-pi-pi,  the  scribe, 

5 qa  a second  time 
(to)  gir  A-dug-ga, 

5 qa  drink  (to)  gir 


Lugal-sirim,  son  of  Hal-hal-la 
5 qa  for  the  city, 

(to)  A-dug-ga. 

Total:  28  qa  of  grain 
given  out 
in  Isin(l). 

Gir  A-dug-ga. 


XXI. 


(Text,  PI.  59,  No.  129.) 

Expenditure  of  Grain. 

An  account  of  expenditure  of  grain  for  different  purposes  and  to  different 
persons. 


1.  VIII  CCLXXV  qa  se-gur 

2.  XLVIII  XII  qa  ds-gur 

3.  sd-du(g)  Gu-du  MU3 4 

4.  XXX  se  XXX  as  gar-ezen-ma 

5.  Gdn-gdn-e 

6.  IX  CC  gur  se-ba  and 

7.  sam  il-me 5 6 7 8 

8.  II  XC  gur  se-ba  amar-tur-me 


8 gur  275  qa  corn, 

48  gur  12  qa  wheat, 

temple  offerings  to  Gu-du,  the  baker, 

30  (qa)  corn,  30  (qa)  wheat,  food 


during  the  festival  of  Gdn-gdn-e, 
9 gur  100  qa 


2 gur  90  (qa)  feed  for  young  cattle, 


1 Cf.  T.  T.}  p.  17. 

2 gir  A-dug-ga,  see  li.  6. 

3 For  name  cf.  Gu-du,  the  farmer,  C.  T.,  I,  94-10-15,  3,  O.,  Ill,  17.  MU  as  a title  = nuhatimmu,  “baker,” 
Muss-Arnolt,  pp.  6666,  667a;  Zimmern,  Z.D.M.G.,  Vol.  53,  p.  115.  DI.KA,  as  denoting  temple  offerings,  would  thus 
include  bread. 

4 SE.BA  = ib-ru,  Br.  7440,  “corn,  food,”  and  would  thus  have  the  same  meaning  as  GAR,  line  4,  but  here  food 
that  is  prepared  in  a certain  way. 

PAR. PAR,  read  ara  = lenu,  Br.  8587,  “to  grind,  cut,  chop,  or  prepare  in  some  way,”  here  prepared  from  some 
plant,  see  next  line.  Cf.  A .B.M PI.  XV,  49;  pp.  16,  47,  136,  cf.  the  °»>elvP A R ,p^  1 R , “ miller.”  and  zinnishiup A R.pA  R , 
M.  6504;  also  Pinches,  Amh.,  p.  151. 

5 Lit.  “plants  lifted  up,”  grown  up.  In  any  case  plants  from  which  the  se-ba  or  food  was  cut  or  prepared. 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


72 


9.  LX  Ri-ug-ba 1 

10.  LX  Da-a-lim 

1 1 . XXX  d Utu-ha-ba 2 3 

12.  sum g hi  XXI  CCLXV  get  se-gur 

13.  sunigin  XLVII  CLI1  qa  ds-gur 

14.  E.NUN  ka  1,1 Ib-al-tiv 1 

15.  ba-zi  itu  Gan-gan-e 

16.  mu  d Su-d En-zu  lugal- 

17.  e ma-da  Za-ab-sa-likl 

18.  mu-hul 

XXII. 


60  (qa)  to  Ri-ug-ba, 

60  (qa)  to  Da-a-lim  (Tdlimf) 

30  (qa)  to*  Utu-ha-ba. 

Total:  21  guv  265  qa  of  corn, 

Total:  47  gar  152  qa  of  wheat, 

E.NUN  at  the  mouth  of  the  river  Ib-al, 
has  been  given  out.  Month  Gan-gan-e, 
year  Gimil-Sin,  the  king, 
devastated  the  country 
of  Z ah mli. 


(Text,  PI.  00,  No.  132;  Halft.,  PI.  XII,  No.  41.) 

Expenditure  of  Flour. 

An  account  of  expenditure  of  flour  and  vegetables  given  out  for  temple  offerings. 


1.  X4 S  z id -kid  sd-du(g)-g  ud  I-kam 

2.  A"  zid  sd-du(g)  ud  I I-kam 

3.  VIII  [q]a  sd-du(g)  ud  1 1 I-kam 

4.  XV  qa  sd-du(g)  ud  IV-kam 

5.  XV  qa  sd-du(g)  ud  V -kam 

6.  X zid-gar  si(g)-ga 6 

7.  V qa  zid  V qa  [ ] 

8.  II  m[u  . . . ] 

9.  V 

[ 


10  (qa)  gu- flour,  temple  offerings  for 
the  1st- day, 

10  (qa),  temple  offerings  for  the  2d 
day, 

8 [q]a,  temple  offerings  for  the  3d  day, 
15  qa,  temple  offerings  for  the  4th  day, 
15  qa,  temple  offerings  for  the  5th  day, 
10  (qa)  flour  food  given  away(?). 

5 qa  flour,  5 qa  [ ] 

2 m[u  . . . ] 

5 

[ ] 


1 The  name  may  be  read  Ri-kalam-ba,  “The  shepherd  of  his  land,”  as  well  as  reading  above,  “The  shepherd  of 
his  people.” 

2 Possibly  zu,  cf.  Z.  A.,  XII,  p.  343. 

3 E.NUN,  “the  great  house.”  KA  = pu,  “mouth,”  or  possibly  “side.” 

4 The  sign  is  BAR  and  might  mean  but  in  analogy  with  following  lines,  where  the  offerings  vary  between 

S and  15  per  day,  it  must  here  mean  10,  as  also  in  line  2. 

3 K U must  denote  some  cereal  or  plant  from  which  flour  could  be  made.  See  Reisner,  T . 7’.,  p.  15a. 

6 SI(G)-ija  may  = sapuku,  “pour  out,”  also  “store,”  Br.  4425,  but  also  nadanu,  “give,  offer,”  Br.  4418,  as  well 
as  nadu.  “deposit,”  Br.  4418. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


73 


XXIII. 

(Text,  PI.  61,  No.  134.) 

Expenditure  of  Wool. 

An  account  of  expenditures  of  different  quantities  of  wool  to  a number  of 
persons,  given  out  by  (or  from)  U r-N igin-gar: 


1.  IV  ma-na  sig-yi 

2.  A-na-na 

3.  IV  dUr-ra-kal 

4.  Ill  Igi-ni-da-a 

5.  Ill  A-ni-a-bi 

6.  Ill  Im-ti-dam 

7.  IV  Ur-dLugal-edin- 

8.  na-ka 

9.  sunigin  XXI  mci-na  dig 

10.  zi(g)-ga 

11.  Id  U r-N igin-yar-ta 

12.  itudNe-su 

13.  mu  us-sa 

14.  en  dEn-ki  Eridu'- 

ba-tug 


4 mana  wool 
(to)  A-na-na, 

4 (to)  Ur-ra-kal, 

3 (to)  Igi-ni-da, 

3 (to)  A-ni-abi, 

3 (to)  Im-ti-dam, 

7 (to)  Ur-Lugal-edin. 

Total:  21  mana  wool 
given  out, 

by  (from)  U r-N igin-gar. 
Month  Nesu, 
year  after 

the  high  priest  of  Ea  of  Eridu 
appointed. 


XXIV. 

, : (Text,  PI.  3,  No.  6.) 

Memorandum.1 

This  small  tablet,  containing  only  two  lines  of  writing,  is  most  likely  to  be 
regarded  as  ‘ ‘notes,”  jotted  down  on  pieces  of  clay  by  the  scribes  when  preparing 
larger  tablets  of  accounts.  Two  objects  are  recorded  as  wanting. 

1.  lal-ni  I gi-md-ku 2 Wanting  one  gi-ma-ku. 

2.  lal-ni  I Bishna(d)  Wanting  one  couch. 

1 Cf.  No.  155;  Amh.,  46,  51. 

2 Cf.  ma  + gi-ku,  T.  T .,  135,  which  Reisner  explains  as  “eine  Art  Kleid  oder  Stoff,”  p.  26. 


10 


IX. 


GLEANINGS. 


A complete  and  thorough  discussion  of  the  entire  terminology  of  the  texts 
of  this  period  would  be  most  desirable,  but  as  this  volume  has  to  be  kept  within 
reasonable  bounds,  I must  Ire  content  only  to  make  some  gleanings  from  these  texts. 

1.  Cuneiform  Signs  and  Readings. 

AB. 

That  the  Sumerian  sign  for  the  Semitic  littu  is  to  be  read  db,  not  lid,  as  Lau, 
Barton  and  even  Pinches  still  continue  to  read  it,  is  seen  from  R.  M.  A.,  No.  103, 
0.  11. 

AB  + gunu  or  ZAG? 

The  new  sign,  Sign  List  No.  79,  comes  nearest  to  AB  + gunu  or  ZAG  (ef. 
No.  94),  but  does  not  exactly  correspond  to  either. 

A + HA  or  HA  + A. 

This  sign,  occurring  thrice  in  these  texts,  No.  1 : 5,  12  and  No.  4 : 7,  Sign  List 
No.  345,  is  composed  of  A with  HA  inside.  This  composite  sign  occurs,  according 
to  Thureau-Dangin,1  already  in  Gudea  texts,  unfortunately  not  published.  It 
also  is  found  in  accounts  from  the  Ur  period,  see  especially  C.  T .,  X,  Pis.  38,  39, 
No.  14316,  where  the  signs  stand  before  numerals,  like  BAD , referring  to  slaves. 
Whether  this  composite  sign  is  the  same  as  the  later  term  HA. A,  also  used  in  regard 
to  slaves,  is  a question  that  cannot  be  definitely  settled,  although  this  seems  to  be 
the  case.  In  later  “contracts”  HA. A occurs  in  connection  with  BAD,  metu,  in 
the  sense  of  halaqu,  referring  to  slaves  running  away.  Cf.  V R.,  25,  16a:  ba-BAD 
ba-an-HA.A  = im-tu-ud  ih-ta-liq.  Also  A.  D.  D.,  I,  p.  34,  No.  61,  6,  BAD  BAD-ma 
HA. A NUN,  referring  to  a slave  girl,  which  no  doubt  is  to  be  rendered  enu  metat-ma 
halqat,  “when  she  dies  or  runs  away,”  etc.2  The  following  NUN,  which  Johns 

1 R.  E.  C.}  No.  471. 

2 Of.  Johns,  A.  D.  D.,  I,  p.  89.  For  BAD  = cnu,  see  Br.  1505. 

[74] 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


75 


does  not  render,  seems  to  stand  for  qarabu,  cf.  Br.  2626,  which  with  ana  means  to 
“go,  be  against,”  cf.  Sennacherib,  III,  1,  I R.,  31,  12.  KnudtzoiTs  rendering, 
sa  [ . . . . s]a  qi-ri-ib,  etc.,  “[ d]er  nahe  stand  deinem  Vater,’  A.  T.,  1,  20,  21,  is 
not  possible,  as  qi-ri-ib  is  not  permansive,  and  the  following  a-na  in  this  case  remains 
unexplained.  In  accordance  with  Knudtzon’s  notes  on  the  signs,  the  reading 
[it-t]a-qi-ri-ib,  “none  that  is  (goes)  against  your  father,”  may  perhaps  be  better. 
Briinnow’s  reading  lip  is  to  be  changed  to  rib,  or  he-in-NUN  = liq-qa-rib,  No.  2626. 
In  any  case  the  meaning  of  this  and  similar  phrases  in  the  stipulations  concerning 
slaves  given  as  pledges1  would  be  that  in  case  the  slave  died  or  ran  away,  the  loss 
of  the  pledge  should  be  put  against  the  owner.2 

The  term  A.IJA  also  occurs  as  a verbal  preposition  particle  and  also  as  a verb 
in  the  Anzanite  texts,  published  by  Scheil,3  and  composite  cuneiform  signs  are  among 
the  noticeable  characteristics  of  the  Proto-Elamite  script  published  by  de  Morgan.4 

In  the  translations  of  the  documents,  where  this  sign  occurs  I have  given 
the  reading  haldqu  as  the  most  probable.5  But  HA. A also  expresses  the  meaning 
of  nabu,  cf.  Br.  11857,  M.  9106,  and  tebii,  M.  9107.  The  HA  +A  . . . Ad  A, 
No.  1 (I)  : 5,  could  very  well  be  an  equivalent  of  KA  . . . GAL-la,  cf.  No.  2 
(II)  : 3,  4,  = ruggumu,  Br.  612,  676,  or  dababu,  or  kenu  dababu,  and  the  documents 
could  refer  not  exactly  to  the  running  away  of  the  slaves  but  in  regard  to  bringing  suit. 

Moreover,  the  composite  sign  A +HA  or  HA  +A,  with  the  reading  ah,6  and  the 
meaning  se-ru-u,  is  given  in  C.  T.,  XIX,  21,  186.  This  seru  occurs  in  groups  with 
sanabu  = emedu,  “to  erect,  put  up.”  If  this  is  the  term  employed  in  these  texts,  it 
might  signify  to  “raise  oneself  against,  to  be  refractory.”  Cf.  Muss-Arnolt,  p.  1109. 

ALIAI. 

See  sign  No.  225  and  date  formula  for  the  26th  year  of  Dungi. 

E + NUN. 

This  sign,  No.  283,  may  be  composed  of  either  E + NUN  or  MA  + NUN . 
Cf.  the  E or  MA.NUN,  Amh.,  p.  200,  line  3;  also  B.  E.,  VI1,  No.  57,  2. 

E + SE. 

A new  sign,  No.  339,  composed  of  E + SE,  or  SE  or  LIL  + SE. 

1 See  A.  D.  D.,  I,  p.  89.  2 Cf.  the  phrase  NER.DA,  below. 

3 D.  P.  M.,  Ill,  Nos.  XXIII,  4;  LXIII,  14;  V,  No.  LXXXVI,  II,  46. 

iD.  P.  M.,  VI,  pp.  83ff. 

6 See  translations  and  notes  to  Nos.  1 (I)  and  4 (III). 

6 From  the  broken  remains  of  the  sign  there  is  very  small  reason  for  reading  za,  cf.  M.  9075. 


76 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


HA. 

The  composite  sign  for  plural,  HI. A,  is  to  be  read  hd,  according  to  R.  M.  A., 
No.  103,  0.,  11;  not  sun,  as  Schorr,  A.  R.  XJ.,  II,  p.  83. 

KA  + GAR  and  SA. 

The  signs  composed  of  KA  + GAR  or  SA  interchange  even  with  KA  pure  and 
simple,  according  to  copy  by  Lau,  in  the  date  formulas  of  the  49— 51st  years  of 
Dung}. 

LA. 

LA,  No.  276,  stands  for  LA,  No.  315,  in  the  phrase  ni-la  and  ni-la-a,  which  is 
equivalent  to  ni-la.  See  No.  11  : 16;  13  : 5. 

LAG  AS  +GAL  or  LA  GAS  -{-AIK  + gunu. 

This  new  sign,  No.  131  : 13,  List  No.  332,  seems  to  correspond  to  these  values,  if 
the  sign  is  not  simply  an  error  for  Lagab  + sig. 

BUM. 

This  sign,  No.  132,  has  the  value  of  NUAI,  see  date  formulas  for  the  3d  and 
4th  years  of  Gimil-Sin,  probably  also  for  NIM  and  perhaps  for  IM.  See  No.  15:1. 


MA.DUS.SA. 

The  term  occurs  only  once  in  these  texts,  No.  77  : 15,  and  is  written  MA.DUB, 
but  I have  no  doubt  that  it  is  the  same  as  the  MA.DUB. BA  of  other  texts. 

The  term  denotes  in  the  first  hand  a pisan  duppi,  ‘ ‘a  receptacle  for 
tablets.”  Hence  the  °ishMA.DUB.BA,  Poebel,  B.  E.,  VP,  p.  171;  the  oiMA  and 
aiAIA.HAL,  B.  E , VP,  84,  17,  18,  19,  103  (A.  R.  U.,  II),  41,  “Urkundenbehaltniss,” 
Schorr,  A.  R.  U.,  II,  p.  55.  The  determinatives  GIS  and  GI  denote  the  material 
of  which  these  receptacles,  ‘ ‘chests”  or  ‘ ‘safes,”  were  made.  Could  possibly  the  MA 
also  be  a term  for  “case”  (tablet)  or  envelope?  Cf.  Muss-Arnolt,p.S15b;  M.  3742. 

Most  frequently  MA.DUB. BA  is  heading  tablets  of  accounts,  as  in  the  number 
of  tablets  under  T.  T.,  No.  146;  and  heading  a list  of  officials,  0.  B.  T.  R.,  No.  162; 
cf.  Lau,  p 44.  Audi.,  No.  121  begins  with  MA.DUB. BA  DUB  GID.DA , which 
Pinches  translates  “the  compiler  of  long  accounts,”  but  which  may  be  a pisan 
duppi  of  duppi,  or  may  denote  an  account  simply.  To  be  noted  is  also  MA.DUB. 
BA  \ gii(d)  engar  gub  ba  \ E-d N in-mar-ti  \ ni-gdl,  C.  T .,  Ill,  14608;  the  dub  ma- 
dub-ba,  T.  T .,  163,  8,  and  mci  dub-ba  \ nig-sid-ag  ba-ni-ib,  H.  L.  C.,  II,  PI.  96,  No. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


77 


118,  1,  2.  In  these  cases  MA.DUB.BA  seems  to  signify  an  account,  or  possibly  the 
making  up  of  accounts. 

But  it  is  quite  certain  that  MA.DUB.BA  also  signifies  an  office,  and  in  one 
instance  it  is  made  the  equivalent  of  dub-sar.  Thus  the  seal  of  R.  T.  C.,  287,  reads: 

| Ba  sa(g)-ga  \ md-dub  ba  nita-zu  \ ; H.  L.  C.,  II,  PI.  96,  No.  120,  R.,  1,  2:  | dub 
Ses-kal-la  j md-dub  ba;  and  A rnh.,  42,  5 : | dub  Gar-u-rum  | md-dub-ba  |,  and  on  the 
seal:  \ Gar-u-rum  \ dub-sar  \.  Cf.  the  sign  &ID  + A = dub-sar-ru,  Br.  6011. 

MA  - pisan,  but  SID  also  = pisan,  Br.  5978,  stands  also  for  kunukku,  Br. 
5971,  hence  MA  might  also  express  the  idea  of  sealing,  which  of  course  again  refers 
to  the  making  up  of  accounts,  or  maker  or  sealer  of  account  tablets. 

MAS. 

The  misreading  of  this  sign  in  face  of  the  repeated  corrections  ought  to  be  a 
thing  of  the  past.  Yet  Lau  still  reads  BIR. 

ME. 

Note  the  form  of  this  sign,  No.  99  : 11,  List  No.  300.  Cf.  Br.  2803,  2804; 
R.  E.  G.,  No.  531. 

MER. 

This  sign,  Nos.  88  and  314,  especially  in  the  connection  with  US,  is  made  very 
like  the  sign  IB  or  GlN.  See  note  to  No.  3 : 12. 

NER.DA. 

This  term  occurs  only  in  the  legal  document,  No.  1 (I) : 7,  and  in  reference 
to  a slave.  The  term  occurs  also  in  Gudea,  Cyl.  A,  12,  26:  du(g)-du(g)-ga  ne-gi 
ner-da  e-ba  im-ma-an-gi , which  Thureau-Dangin  translates:  “Er  beseitigte  die 

Rechtsstreite,  vom  Tempel  beseitigte  er  die 1 In  Cyl.  B,  18,  3 we  have: 

nig-erim  e ba  im-ma-an-gi,  “alles  Ueble  vom  Tempel  beseitigte  er.'”2 

Here  NER.DA  seems  to  be  a term  fo:  something  undesirable,  and  as  it  is  brought 
into  connection  with  the  instituting  of  lawsuits  or  legal  quarrels,  it  might  express 
the  idea  of  “claimant”  in  a bad  sense  of  this  term.  In  regard  to  the  term 
employed  in  No.  1 (I)  of  these  texts,  it  might  denote  a runaway,  refractory  or 
troublesome  slave. 

NER.DA  also  occurs  in  the  well-known  name  for  the  deity,  A-a,  i.e.,  Se-ner-da- 
kallat-Samas,  and  in  the  feminine  proper  name,  which  is  to  be  read  Amat-A-a- 
kallat-Samas.3 

1 S.  A.  K.  /.,  pp.  102,  103.  2 S.  /I.  K.  /.,  pp.  13S,  139. 

3 See  Jensen,  Z.  A.,  I,  pp.  398,  399;  B.  E.,  VI1,  No.  94,  5,  6. 


78 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


But-  in  regard  to  the  NER.DA  of  our  text,  it  might  also  be  explained  in  accord- 
ance with  phrases  of  late  “contracts”  in  regard  to  slaves,  or  more  particularly 
in  the  stipulations  made  in  case  of  death  or  escape  of  a slave  given  as  a pledge. 
NER  could,  of  course,  stand  for  belu  and  DA  for  the  usual  ina  eli,  ana  or  ina.  Cf. 
the  examples  given  by  Johns,  A.  I).  D.,  I,  p.  89;  also  A. HA  above  and  translation 
of  No.  1 (I). 

NIT  A. 

Note  the  form  for  this  sign,  No.  24;  No.  67  : 4,  omitting  the  last  perpendicular 
wedge. 

SAG. 

This  sign,  No.  122,  seems  also  to  have  the  value  of  KIN,  as  it  occurs  in  place 
of  that  sign  in  the  name  of  the  month  Se-kin-kud.  See  No.  100  : 78. 


SAG  + NI. 

This  is  a new  composite  sign,  List  No.  123,  made  up  of  SAG  with  NI  inside, 
and  occurring  in  accounts  in  regard  to  storage  of  grain. 

It  occurs  mostly  in  connection  with  DUB  as  SAG  + NI.DUB,  Nos.  100  and 
104  passim,  but  also  alone  as  SAG  + Nl-bi,  etc.,  No.  100  :91.  Compare  the  usual 
term  ni-dub  in  storage  accounts. 

SAL  + ME. 

See  sign  No.  294. 

SA(M). 

This  sign,  No.  56,  occurs  in  these  texts  both  with  and  without  the  addition 
A. AN.  With  the  meaning  “to  buy,”  it  is  to  be  read  sa(m),  not  sam.  See  now 
M.  3235;  Pinches,  Amh.,  p.  104. 

SIL. 

The  reading  of  the  sign  No.  280  is  sil,  see  Pinches  in  J . R.  A.  S.,  1905,  p.  144, 
cuneiform  text,  line  7.  Schorr,  however,  stills  reads  the  ideogram  BUHUDU , 
A.  R.  U .,  II,  p.  82. 

SA(G)-ba. 

This  for  sa(g)-bi,  “in  its  midst,”  No.  79  : 19. 

SE.PAD. 

SE.PAD  =--  se-um,  B.  E.,  VI1,  131,  1.  Cf.  Babyloniaca,  III,  p.  196. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


79 


SU(G).GI. 

This  most  probably  is  only  a phonetic  writing  for  su-gi.  See  No.  3:2;  cf. 
B.  E.,  VI1,  95,  19  21;  101,  14.  It  denotes  three  officials,  sebu,  Br.  10841,  baru , 
Br.  10826,  lemu,  Br.  10833.  But  su(g)  = nazazu,  Br.  10847 ; hence  the  term  for 
witness  may  better  be  derived  from  asdbu,  which  would  correspond  to  the  mukinnu 
from  kdnu. 

SU  + NIGIN. 

If  the  first  sign  in  No.  79  : 37  really  is  SU  + NIGIN  and  not  SI,  which  after 
all  is  the  most  probable,  the  following  la  would  be  the  overhanging  vowel  of  SU  + 
NIGIN  and  would  show  that  this  composite  sign  is  to  be  read  SU  + kil. 

SU.TtJ(R). 

This  term  may  be  explained  as  a phonetic  writing  for  su-dur,  see  No.  1 (I)  : 12, 
but  it  might  also  stand  for  tdru,  perhaps  with  the  meaning  of  reversion  of  judgment, 
reopening  of  a case,  or  reclamation. 


TAG. 

The  rather  unusual  sign  for  this  period,  No.  346,  must  be  TAG,  KID  or  SID. 
Cf.  Br.  1402-1409;  R.  E.  C.,  No.  175. 

UD  + gunu? 

This  new  sign,  No.  102,  comes  nearest  to  UD  + gunu,  in  analogy  with  the  make- 
up of  the  IGI  + gunu  or  slg. 

UM  + ME. 

This,  No.  72,  is  also  a new  sign  and  most  likely  a ligature  of  UM  and  ME. 

Z A. IN  ANN  A. 

This  phrase  occurs  in  several  proper  names,  as  ZA.IN ANN A or  IN ANN A.ZA, 
and  might  be  read  sub  or  halbili  (see  Br.  11743;  C.  T.,  XXV,  27 a,  15,  6,  10;  XXV, 
3,  65) ; but  it  is  doubtful  to  my  mind  whether  these  readings  are  to  be  applied  to 
the  phrase  included  in  these  names. 

2.  Terms  of  Court  Proceedings. 

igi-ni-ni-igi-gar,  ‘‘he  made  his  face  appear”  = “to  bring  into  court,”  No. 
1 (I)  : 3. 


so 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


du(g)-ni-g  dl-la- , “lie  has  made  suit”  = “to  bring  suit  or  reclamation,”  No. 
2 (II)  : 3.  Of.  du(g)-ma-ma,  etc.  = ruggumu,  A.  R.  U.,  II,  p.  84,  etc. 

ba-a-n i-du-u,  “he  has  not  appeared”  = “to  appear  before  court,”  No.  2 (II)  : 5. 
Of.  KAK  = sandqu,  a-na  1)1. KUD  is-ni-qu-ma,  B.  E.,  VI1,  No.  56,  6. 

mu  lugal,  “by  the  name  of  the  king”  - “to  make  accusation  or  arraign,” 
Nos.  1 (I)  :5;  also  mu-lugal-bi  in{-na  or  ni)-pa(d),  Nos.  2 (II)  :9;  4 (III)  : 4.  Of. 
itrna,  itmu  of  later  documents,  A.  R.  U.,  II,  p.  87. 

ba-an-gub,  “they  shall  be  responsible,”  No.  1 (I)  : 13.  Of.  nazazu,  B.  E., 
VI1,  2 (A.  R.  U.,  II2),  11;  23  (.4.  R.  U.,  II,  10),  13. 

galu-enim-ma-bi-me,  “the  men  of  the  proceedings,”  Nos.  1 (I):  21;  2 (II)  : 17; 
4 (III)  : 13,  and  passim  = “the  witnesses  of  the  proceedings.”  Of.  mu-kin-nu 
of  later  documents. 

dis  stands  before  the  name  of  the  witnesses,  Nos.  1 (I)  : 14-20;  4 (III)  : 9—1 1 ; 
or  the  names  are  given  without  any  sign  before  them,  No.  2 (II)  : 10-16. 

3.  Terms  of  Loan  and  Purchase  Documents. 

in-si-sa(m),  “he  has  bought,”  No.  14:6. 

azag,  “purchase  money,”  No.  16  : 2. 

mu-si(m)-dam,  “has  given  (as  a loan),”  No.  14  : 4. 

har-su,  “loan  at  interest,”  Nos.  23  : 1 ; 24  : 1 ; 25  : 1. 

mas,  “rate  of  interest,”  Nos.  23  : 2;  24  : 2;  25  : 2;  27  : 2;  28  : 2;  31  : 2. 

si(m)-mu,  “payment,”  No.  13:6. 

gi-gi-ne,  “shall  return,  pay  back,”  No.  18  : 14. 

ni-la,  ni-la-a,  “he  shall  weigh,  pay,”  Nos.  11  : 16;  13  : 5. 

nu-na-si(m),  “(In  case)  he  does  not  pay,”  No.  13  : 9. 

nu-ub-ma(SAR) , “(In  case)  he  does  not  bring  in,”  No.  7 :4;  cf.  No.  10  : 4. 
ib-zu-zu,  “he  shall  cause  to  be  brought,  pay,”  No.  7 : 6. 
su-ba-ti,  “he  has  received  (as  a loan),”  Nos.  13  : 4;  17  : 5;  18  : 5;  22  : 6;  25  : 5; 
27  :6;  31  :6;  “he  has  received  (as  purchase  money),  ”No.  16  : 5. 
ib-tab-pi,  “it  shall  be  increased,  doubled,”  No.  13  : 10. 

tukundi-bi  ( Su.NIG.TUR.LA-bi ),  Nos.  7:1;  10  : 1;  13  : 9 = sum-ma,  Br. 
7256,  cf.  Old  Babylonian  family  laws  and  Code  of  Hammurabi,  a legal  phrase  thus 
being  employed  as  far  back  as  the  Ur  period  at  least,  a fact1  that  has  to  be  taken 
into  consideration  in  the  historical  study  of  the  Code  of  Hammurabi.  SV  = ana, 
generally  a postposition,  but  also  occurring  before  the  noun.  Cf.  S.  A.  K.  T.,  70, 


1 As  I pointed  out  in  my  paper  read  before  the  Fifteenth  Congress  of  Orientalists  in  Copenhagen,  1908. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


81 


43-46.  GAR,  NIG  — epesu,  kcvnu,  sakanu ; LA,  among  other  things  also  sakanu, 
Br.  10111.  GAR.TUR  = minima  i-su,  Br.  12044.  TUR  and  TUR.TUR.LA 
= sihhirutu,  Br.  4113,  which  perhaps  is  not  so  easy  to  explain.  The  phrase  seems 
to  mean  “for  its  happening,”  “in  case  of  its  taking  place,”  and  would  be  in  analogy 
with  our  phrase  “in  case.” 

u-ru  ba-gar,  “the  document  was  made,”  No.  13  : 16. 

dis  and  igi  interchange  before  the  names  of  the  galu-enim-ma-bi-me  or  witnesses. 
See  Nos.  14  : 12-22  and  16  : 6—10 ; 18  : 6-7,  respectively. 

In  regard  to  the  form  of  the  documents,  two  kinds  of  documents  of  purchases 
are  to  be  noted.  One  kind,  Nos.  14,  15,  is  a deed  of  sale,  where  the  whole  transac- 
tion is  stated ; others  are  simply  acknowledgments  of  the  receipt  of  the  purchase 
money  for  an  object  sold.  See  Nos.  16,  17. 

4.  Terms  of  Accounts. 

In  General. 

su-ba-ti,  “he  has  (it  is)  received,”  equivalent  to  dub,  “to  receive  on  account.” 

ba-gub,  “he  has  (it  is)  brought  in,  is  at  hand.” 

ba-zi,  “he  has  (it  is)  given,  paid  out.” 

gub-ba,  credit,  “at  hand.” 

zi(g)-ga,  debit,  “given  out,  expenditures.” 

dub,  “account,  on  account  of.” 

mu,  “by  name,  on  behalf  of.” 

gir,  mse(?). 

lal-ni,  “deficit.” 

si-ni-ib,  “surplus,  remainder.” 

azag,  “silver  value.” 

an-na,  “lead  value.” 

ma-dub-ba,  “account.” 

nig-sid-ag,  “making  up  of  accounts.” 

ib-ra,  ib-ru,  “sealed,”  cf.  Br.  4970;  B.  E.,  VI1,  82,  11. 

Seals  on  account  tablets  are  dub-sar  seals.  See  especially  the  carefully  repro- 
duced seals  of  the  Amh.  volume. 

In  Itogard  to  Fields. 

ab-engar,  No.  92  : 15,  ab-nam,  No.  92  : 1,  al-du,  No.  90  : 2,  sag-du,  No.  90  : 1, 
terms  used  to  express  the  cultivation  of  fields. 

gar,  a measure  of  area,  No.  92  : 2,  etc.,  cf.  B.  E.,  VI1,  44,  1;  60,  6. 

it 


82 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


In  Regard  to  Fruit  Harvest. 

sir,  “(fruit)  taken  away,  or  no  fruit,”  No.  75  : 15,  17. 
tig-a,  “(trees)  actually  being  harvested,”  No.  75  : 16. 

In  Regard  to  Cattle. 

rii-a,  tu(d)-da,  “(new)  born,”  No.  79  : 1,  21,  23,  29. 


5.  Officials  and  Employes. 
dub-sar,  equivalent  to  ma-dub-ba,  see  above. 

gahi-ku-md-se-ti-a,  “(lie  man  that  receives  the  grain,  grain  receiver,”  No. 
1 IS  : 9. 

gir,  the  most  prominent  official  in  these  accounts.  That  gir  is  an  official  is 
seen  from  the  fact  that  he  is  travelling,  cf.  No.  120  : 2,  but  in  many  cases  it  seems 
as  if  the  term  simply  meant  vise.  This  personage  seems  to  be  a representative 
official  or  commissioner,  that  would  superintend,  control  and  check  off  accounts 
kept  and  expenses  made,  cf.  the  gir  si(g)-ga  = manzaz  pdni,  Br.  2101;  C.  T.,  VII, 
19984,  R.,  16;  of  temples,  C.  T.,  21399,  R.,  24;  of  the  pa-te-si,  C.  T.,  12245,  R.,  5; 
royal  commissioner,  C.  T.,  Ill,  13166,  L.  E.  He  would  receive,  distribute  or  perhaps 
transmit  grains  and  other  supplies  brought  in  and  given  out.  Cf.  T.  T.,  94,  X,  13; 
Amh.  102,  R.,  5;  120.  Sometimes  the  pa  seems  to  take  the  place  of  the  gir,  see 
Amh.,  No.  27;  II.  L.  C.,  II,  PI.  70,  VIII,  11.  The  gir  official  also  plays  the  same 
conspicuous  part  in  the  Elamite- Anzanite  accounts,  see  D.  P.  M .,  IX.  See  also  the 
gir,  not  NER,  Schorr,  A.  R.  U.,  II,  p.  82,  in  B.  E.,Yll,  24,  4;  32,  9;  102,  4;  104,  14; 
106,  6.  Note  the  sib  gir,  No.  96  : 13. 

ma-dub-ba,  equivalent  to  dub-sar,  see  above. 
su(g)-gi,  see  above. 
ukus-nita  pa-al,  see  No.  3 : 12. 


6.  Months. 

itu  Azag-sim  is  a new  month  name.  To  judge  from  the  meaning  of  the  words 
that  compose  the  name,  it  must  be  a spring  month.  See  Nos.  15  : 17;  42  : 8;  48  : 7. 
itu  Se-sag-kud,  for  itu  Se-kin-kud. 

itu-Su-es-ku[l],  No.  53  : 6,  cf.  itu  Su-es-sa  and  itu  Su-sa-es. 
itu-ge  itu  VI  is  a phrase  occurring  on  these  tablets  just  before  the  date  formula. 
The  only  plausible  explanation,  unless  the  phrase  signifies  a name,  is  “its  months 
(are)  six  months,”  and  would  thus  denote  a half  year  account.  See  Nos.  83  :45; 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


S3 


84  : 89;  112  : 19;  114  : 17;  168  : 2.  Cf.  R.  T.  C.,  No.  398;  H.  L.  C.,  II,  PI.  56,  No. 
8,  V,  6;  also  itu  V,  C.  T.,  X,  PI.  39,  No.  14316,  III,  18. 

The  two  slanting  wedges  after  itu  Se-kin-kud,  No.  1 (I)  : 22,  might  denote  “the 
second  Se-kin-kud i.e.,  Dir- Se-kin-kud,  or  the  2d  or  20th  day. 

7.  Days. 

ud-X-ba-ni  is  the  general  term  for  denoting  the  days  of  the  months  in  these 
texts.  The  term  ba-ni  may  have  to  be  read  bci-zal.  In  any  case  it  is  equivalent 
to  kam,  and  it  is  to  be  regarded  as  denoting  an  ordinal  number.  It  has  been  pointed 
out  that  kam,  when  used  after  days  in  similar  texts,  stands  before  the  month  names, 
see  C.  T .,  Ill,  19740,  192-194;  but  it  is  also  found  following  the  month,  C.  T.,  Ill, 
21510,  55;  V,  17767,  R.,  7;  13160,  L.  E.  That  ba-ni  denotes  an  ordinal  number  is 
seen  from  examples  like  itu  Se-kul  ud  XXV -ba-ni-ta,  C.  T .,  I,  94-10-16,  59. 

8.  Date  Formulas. 

For  new  date  formulas  and  new  variations  of  formulas  known  before,  see  p.  27. 

The  different  date  formulas  given  under  the  5th  year  of  Bur-Sin  are  no  doubt 
only  variations  of  the  same  date  formula. 


X. 


NAMES  AND  TITLES. 


The  aim  of  the  following  list  has  been  merely  to  register  the  names,  Sumerian 
as  well  as  Semitic,  in  the  form  they  occur  in  these  texts.  To  translate  and  com- 
ment on  the  names  would  have  been  an  interesting  and  profitable  study  in  itself, 
but  it  would  have  carried  me  over  the  limits  set  for  this  volume.  By  printing  the 
Sumerian  names  in  Italics  I have  not,  of  course,  indicated  that  they  really 
are  to  be  read  as  they  now  stand.  As  almost  every  name  presents  more  or  less 
uncertain  readings,  I have  simply  shrunk  back  from  disfiguring  the  pages  by  intro- 
ducing capitals  where  the  reading  is  not  known.  The  scholar  will  need  no  such 
warning,  as  far  as  Sumerian  names  are  concerned. 


Abbreviations. 

!>.,  brother;  (1.,  daughter;  I'.,  father;  feni.,  feminine;  li.,  husband;  m.,  mother;  s.,  son;  si.,  sister;  w.,  wife. 


1.  Names  op  Men  and  Women. 


A-a-Zn,  f.  of  Lagab  + sig-tur,  90  : 10. 
A-ab-ga-mu,  16  : 6. 

A-a-galu-dug , 119  : 7. 

\A'\-a-ga-tum,1  135  : 14. 
A-a-gin-n[a(d)],2  79  : 10. 

A-a-kal-la,  56  : 31. 

[A]-a-na-ib-e,  19  : 3. 

A-a-ni,  6S  : 12. 

[A~\-a-tu(r)-ra,  67  : 3,  10. 

A-a-ur-mu , 81  : 10,  12. 

A-ba-An-da,  96  : 22. 

A-ba-dEn-lil,  96  : 21. 

Ab-ba-mu,  113  : 4. 

An-ba-ni ,3  27  : 5;  seal,  94  : 6. 


A-ba-ra-an-na,  96  : 35. 

A-bil-[?]t  130  : 7. 

A-bil-Engar,  f.  of  Ma-gur-ri,  139  : 6. 

A-bil-la-lum,  24  : 5;  79  : 33. 

A-E-a-ki,  96  : 20. 

A-ku-za,  56  : 30. 

Ab-ta-ab-e,  95  : 20. 

A-bu-iu-ni,  135  : 31. 

Ad-da , f.  of  (1)  Su-Ad-da,  (2)  Su-dNin-Safi,  (3)  Ur-Luji, 
(4)  Ka-dI nnanna,  (5)  Ur-Nigin-gar,  110  : IX,  3-7. 
Ad-da-kal-la,  7 : 10;  55  : 13. 

Ad-dEn-lil,  84  : 88. 

A-dug-ga,  120  : 3,  6,  10,  14. 

A -ga-ti,  135  : 28. 


1 Perhaps  only  A-ga-tum,  ef.  A-ga-ti. 

2 Huber,  P.  K.  U.  N.,  p.  41a,  following  Reisner,  T.  T 35,  II,  11,  reads  A-a-gim-nad. 

3 Cf.  dBa-ni. 


[84] 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


85 


A-ga-lB,1  135  : 14. 

A-ha-ni-sv , 135  : 2. 

A-feu-ni-lsul],  135  : 18. 

A-jvu-hu-ni ,2  64  : 3. 

A-fiu-um,  117  : 38. 

A-fcu-um-ma,  128  : 9. 

A-ka-gal-l\,  54  : 4. 

A-kal-la,  58  : 7;  s.  of  Za-ma-[?\,  171  : 3. 

A-ku-za,  56  : 30. 

A-la-la,  1 :2,  3;  18  : 3;  35  : 3. 

A-Vi-a-bi,  134  : 5. 

A-dLuh,  96  : 30. 

A-lul-lul,  95  : 12. 

Ama-um  + me,  20  : 10. 

A-mur-Kal-la , 116  : 11. 

A-na-na,  134  : 2. 

An-ba-ni 3 

An-dirig-ga ,4  128  : 9. 

Alim-a ,5  135  : 18. 

A-NE-ni,  98  : 4. 

An-rii,  95  : 30. 

An-U tu-bar-ra ,6 7  67  : 7. 

A-iu,  32  : seal. 

Azag-zi{d)-da,  135  :7;  s.  of  I-ba-ni-iz,  29  : 1,  seal. 
B a-a  -na-zal-la,  115  : 2. 

Ba-la-an-gi,  4 : 10. 

Ba-lul-e,  8:1. 

Ba-bd{g)-ga,  95  : 5. 

Ba-ta,  96  : 70. 

Be-li-sar,  116  : 5. 

Bu-bu,  95  : 27. 

Bu-bu-a,  133  : 14. 

Bu-ga-ga,’’  135  : 35,  36. 

Bu-la-ni,  56  : 27. 

Bur-1  Da-mu,  96  : 28. 

Bur-za-1  nnanna 
Bu-zi-na,  56  : 3. 

Da-a-[  . . . ],  130  : 5. 

Da-a-lim,  23  : 10;  129  : 10. 

Da-bi-a,  75  : 25. 

Da-gi,  126  : 7,  22. 

1 Perhaps  [A]-a-ga-tum,  cf.  A-ga-ti. 

2 Cf.  P.  K.  U.  N.,  p.  45a. 

3 See  Dingir-ba-ni,  27  : 5;  94  : 6. 

4 See  dDirig-gu, 

5 Perhaps  Qub-a. 

0 Perhaps  dU tu-bar-ra. 

7 Or  Sir-ga-ga. 


Da-ku-tum,  116  : 16. 

Da-da,  56  : 9. 

Da-gi,  126  : 7,  22. 

Dagal-ra,  126  : 10. 

Da-dl-l\,  f.  of  Nu-ur-i-li,  11:3. 

Dam-[  ....],  56  : 13. 

Darn-[  . . .]-An,  96  : 49. 

Dam-bu-da-a,  56  : 13. 

Dir-de,s  153  : 2. 

Dingir-ba-ni ,9  27  : 5,  and  seal. 
dDirig-ga,10  128  : 9. 

Dub-bu-zi-na,  56  : 3. 

Du-du,  s.  of  Ni,  110  : 13. 

Dug  A . ■ . ],  96  : 52. 

Dumu-[  ....],  (1)  f.  of  Nin-[  ....],  163  : 3; 

(2)  f.  of  Lugal-1  Utu-[  . . . . ],  57  : 13. 

Dun-gi,  57  : 8,  and  dates  of  Dun-gi. 
dDu  n-gi-ba-ni,  116  : 4. 

1 'j-a-ma-ne,  139  : 1. 

E-gal-la-tu(r)-ra,  64  : 6. 

E-la-[  . . . ],  115  : 8. 

E-ia-ag-nu-a,n  11  : 1. 

E-mul-dDumu,  111  : 5. 

En-[  . . . ],  96  : 53. 

Engar-dug , 96  : 14. 

Enim-ma-ni-galu,  96  : 57. 
dEn-k[i]-du(g) , 96  : 59. 

En-lil-da-ner-gal,  86  : 14. 

En-lil-ld-[  . . . ],  56  : 10. 

En-lil-li,  96  : 41. 

En-lil-ld-a-An-azag-ga,Vi  111  : 8. 

En-lil-ld-sd{g) , s.  of  Lugal-nanga,  14  : 3. 
dEn-lil-mu,  164  : 4. 

[ U]r13-En-ki-im-du,  111  : 2. 

En-ne-zu,  128  : 3. 

[ . . . ]-dEn-ki,  57  : 2. 

E-pa-e,  96  : 31. 

G a-gi,  33  : 4. 

Galu-d[  . . . ],  96  : 3S. 

Galu-Bi,u  109  : 9. 

Galu-Bi-bi,  96  : 27. 

8 See  Si-a-de. 

8 See  An-ba-ni. 

10  See  An-dirig-ga. 

11  See  I-la-ag-nu-d. 

12  “Enlil  is  the  begotten  one  of  the  bright  heaven.” 

13  Or  Su. 

14  Or  Gas. 


86 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


[Ga]lu-bu-ga-ga,  135  : 36. 

Galu-dDam-[  . . . ],  96  : 26. 

GaludDa-mu,  70  : 10. 

Galu-Dingir-ra,  139  : 2. 

Galu-dug-ga-de-gal,  50  : 6. 

Galu-dEn-lil-l&,  (1)  111:9;  (2)  s.  of  galu-  Utu , 3 : 4. 
Galu-dEn-zu,  (1)  41  :6;  56  : 22,  25;  (2)  s.  of  Ma 

-[...],  160  : 4. 

Gcdu-Gdn-[  . . ],'  12  : 11. 

Galu-gir-si-di-a,  110  : col.  X,  9. 

Galu-[  . . . ]-cZi\  95  : 25. 

Galu-ka-ni,  109  : 13. 

Gcilu-di[r(‘!)-]ri-e-r[u‘!],  46  : 9. 

Galu-Kin-gi-a,  46  : 8. 

Galu-dLagab  sig,  72  : 1;  104  : 31. 

Galu-dLuh-dKA , 104  : 7. 

Galu-na-ru-a , 126  : 6. 

Galu-dNin-[  . . . ],  46  : case,  3. 

Galu-dNin-gul,  58  : 12. 

G a iu-N i[g  in]-ga  r-[ ro] , 96  : 61. 

GalvJ^N in-safi , 61  : 6;  74  : 8;  101  : 18;  166  : 7. 

Galu-dRa,  121  : 7. 

Galu-dSug-[  . . . ],  12  : 12. 

[Ga]Iu-Ur,  96  ; 16. 

Galu-Ur-lci-[  . . ],  10S  : 11. 

Galu^Utu,  (1)  13  :4;  (2)  f.  of  Galu-En-lil-ld,  3 : 4. 
Galu-,  160  : 8. 

Ga-gi,  33  : 4. 

Gdn-sd(g) ,1 2  95  : 29. 

Gar-kal-la,  47  : 3. 

Gar-sa(m)-bi,  130  : 9. 
dGestin-an,  102  : 5. 
d G estin-an-ka , 102  : 2. 

Gln-dEn-zu,  fem.,  si.  of  Sir-ha,  1 ; 10. 

Gln-har-fiar,  fem.,  116  : 15. 

Gin-Nin-e-[  . . . ],  f.,  143  : 3. 

Gir-a,  f.  of  Ur-dIgi-zi-bar-ra,  109  : 10. 

Glr-dBi-li  + li,  56  : 46. 

Glr-dEn-li[l]-ga(l),  52  : 3. 

Giri-gi-na,3  91  : 30. 


Gir  i-li-sd(g),  22  :5;  95  : 11. 

Gir-Nin-[  . . . ],  135:  12  ; s.  of  Dumu-[  . . . ],  163  : 3 
Gir-ni-$d(g)  ,4 5  16  : 9. 

Gu(d)-da-ri-a,  128  : 6. 

Gu-de-a,  15  : 5;  96  : 40. 

Gu{d)-dGeUin-an,  102  : 3 
Gu-du,  23  : 3. 

Gu-du-du,  73  : 3. 

Gu('?)-gu-a-la,  108  : 1. 

Gu-la-a,  139  : 4. 

[G]u-za-ni,s  123  : 5. 

H al-fial-la,  f.  of  Lugal-sirim,  120  : 8. 

IJa-zi-in,6  111  : 1. 
idc-sa(g),  95  : 29. 

H il-ma-gu-ra,  87  : 2. 

Qu-mu-u-sa,  128  : 1. 

IJu-pi-pi,  11  ; 12;  119  : 5;  147  : 5. 

JJus-a,  13  : 14. 

I -ba-m-iz,  f.  of  A-zi(d)-da,  29  : seal. 

I-dim-dingir,  s.  of  Su-sa-ra-ni,  39  : 3,  and  seal. 
dIgi-du,  144  : 8. 

Igi-dEn-lU,  95  : 21. 

Igi-Ku ,7  S7  : 4. 

Igi-ni-da-a,  134  : 4. 

Igi-$d(g)-sd(g),  68':  3. 

I-la-ag-nu-u 8 
t-li-be-ll,  56  : 24. 
t-lX-nu-ri,  56  : 22. 

Im-ti-dam,  f.,  134  : 6. 

Innanna-Kalam-ba ,9  129  : 9. 
d I nnanna-ur,  139  : 7. 

In-ta,10  56  : 38. 

I-ri-bu-um,  56  : 2. 

I-sar-ba-kal,  116  : 14. 

I-sar-i-li,n  s.  of  Su-la-ur{T)-ni,  39  : seal. 

I-sar-ni-si,  46  : 11. 

Is-me-i-ll,  23  : 5. 

/-to,12  1 17  : 35. 

I-za-ur  sig(‘l),  119  : S. 

1-zi-zi,'3  117  : 41. 


1 C’f.  Galu-gan-gu-la,  P.  K.  U.  N.,  p.  89a. 

2 See  JJ,c-sd{g).  Cf.  IJc(gdn)-na-sag,  P.  K.  U.  N.,  p.  123a. 

3 Cf.  Giri-gi,  P.  K.  U.  N.,  p.  109a. 

4 Cf.  Gir-ni-sa(g) , C.  T .,  V,  1775S,  I,  2. 

5Cf.  P.  K.  U.  N„  p.  111a. 

0 Means  “axe.”  Possibly  it  is  a noun,  not  a proper  name. 

7 Cf.  dKu,  Br.  10569. 


8 See  E-la-ag-nu-u. 

0 See  Ri-Kalam-ba. 

10  Cf.  In-ta-e-a,  P.  K.  U.  N.,  p.  546. 

11  Perhaps  better  I-md-i-Ti. 

12  Cf.  I-ta-e-a  and  In-ta-e-a,  P.  K.  U.  N.,  p.  546. 

13  See  Ni-zi-zi. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


87 


K a-gi-nci,  57  : 22. 

Ka-gu-du-ma,  88  : 11. 

Ka-dInnanna,  110  : col.  IX,  6. 

Ka-itu-Ab-b,  37  : 5. 

Ka-ka,  f.  of  Ur-dPA.KU,  14  : 5. 

Ka-la-a,  139  : 3. 

Kalam-da(?)-ga,  21  : 17. 

Kalam-da-r[a],  87  : 5. 

Kalam-il-e,  31  : 5. 

Kalam-lam-mu , 7:11. 

Kalam-ne-mu ,l  7:11. 

Kal-dEngar,  17  : 6. 

Kal-la,  56  : 34. 

Ka-sag-a , 87  : 3. 

Ki-da-lum , 110  : col.  X,  3. 

Kur-bi-[  „ . ],  142  : 9. 

Kur-ni-mu ,2  1 : 20. 

Kur-ru-ti,  110  : col.  IX,  1. 

L agab  + sig-tur,  s.  of  A-a-bi,  90  : 10. 

Li-sa-be-i-ll-du ( ?) , 126  : 18. 

La-[  . J,  f.  of  [ ]-Se-ha-m[a],  57  : 11. 

Lugal-[  . . . ],  96  : 73. 

Lugal-[  . . . ]-a6-[  ....],  96  : 62. 

Lugal-azag-'c , 67  : 8. 

Lugal-azag-z[u\,3  13  : 12;  146  : 14. 

Lugal-A-zi(d)-da,  56  : 19;  81  : 8;  111  : 11. 

Lugal-Bdr , fem.,  w.  of  Su-dDumu-zi,  125  : 7. 

[ Luga]l  (l)-Bu-ga-ga , 135  : 36. 

Lugal-Dub-bu(?) , 96  : 43. 

Lugal-dug-ga,  84  : 63;  103  : 9;  122  : 4. 

Lugal-ezen,  (1)  87  : 6;  (2)  s.  of  Qal-Jial-la,  120  : 7. 
Lugal-gis,  1 : 13. 

Lugal-giS-bar,  96  : 29. 

Lugal-fea-m[a ],4  57  : 7. 

Liigal-iskim-zi,  31  : 3. 

Lugnl-iskim-zi(d)-da , 2 : 2,  7. 

Lugal-itu-Da,  13  : 13. 

Lugal-ka-gi-na,  32  : seal;  33  : 5;  45  : 5;  99  : 13. 
Lugal-ki,  96  : 19. 

Lugal-ms-a,  99  : 13. 

Lugal-N am-tar-ri , 29  : 2;  38  : 6;  42  : 3;  95  : 2. 
Lugal-nanga,  (1)  47  : 2;  (2)  f.  of  En-lil-al-sag , 14  : 13. 
Lugal-N ibrukl , 96  : 46. 

[Lug]al(l)dSag-[  . . . ],  12  : 12. 

1 See  Uku-ne-mu. 

2 See  Pap-ni-mu. 

3 Cf.  P.  K.  U.  N.,  129,  p.  129a. 

4 Cf.  Lugal-fia-ma-til,  P.  K . U.  N.,  p.  132a. 


Lugal-sd(g)-ga , (1)  3 : 2;  (2)  s.  of  Bur-za-Innanna , 40  : 3, 
and  seal. 

Lugal-Sd(g)-ld,  160  : 6. 

Lugal-s  d (g)-sa-ri 
[. Lug~\al{l)-Ur , 96  : 16. 

Lugal-ur-ra-ni,  18  : 4. 

Lugal-u(d)-da,  96  : 34. 

Lugal-u-Hm,  109  : 16. 

Lugal-dUtu,  13  : seal. 

[Lug]al(?)-dUtu-[  . . . ],  s.  of  Dum[u-],  57  : 12. 
Lugal-te-fiu-e,  s.  of  Alu-Jia,  8 : 3. 

Lugal-zag(7)-e,  96  : 43. 

Lu}idKa,  101  : 70. 

Lul-a,  109  : 11;  119  : 4. 

Lul-u-gu,  144  : 13. 

[ . . . ]-dLu-$d(g),  149  : 5. 

Lu-u[d(7)],  12  : 4. 

M a-ad-i-l'i?  19  : 5;  30  : 3;  104  : 39. 

Ma-ba-tu(d)-da,  96  : 39. 

Ma-da-l-l'i ,6  11  : 14. 

Ma-du-du , 96  : 42. 

Ma-d[ug]( ?),  f.  of  Galu-dEn-zu,  160  : 4. 

Ma-gu-um ,7 

Md-gur-ri ,8  s.  of  A-bil-Engar,  139  : 5. 

Mas-urudu-Gu-la,  96  : 44. 

Mer-ab , 96  : 25. 

Me-ru-ru,  98  : 3. 

[ . . . ]-d Mu-ba-azag , 135  : 13. 

Mu-ha-ba-tug-tug , f.  of  Lugal-te-Jiu-e,  8 : 4. 

Mu-ma-da , 164  : 5. 

M u-ni-mah,  35  : 4. 

"No-ba-fia-su,  96  : 11. 

Na-ba-pi-su,  96  : 11. 

Na-ba-Sd(g),  109  : 9. 

Na-ru-a,  81  : 7. 

N am-tar-ri,  96  : 18. 

Nam-uru,  96  : 13. 

Ne-galu-urru-ki,  108  : 3. 

Ne-ra-ni,  116  : 2. 

Ne-sag,  96  : 33,  39. 

Ni,  (1)  f.  of  Dumu-nita-ga[b\,  108  : 10;  (2)  f.  of  Su-dNin- 
sah,  110  : col.  VIII,  1;  IX,  2. 

Ni-ba-ab-ul,  111  : 7. 

Ni-du-l  . . ],  102  : 7. 

5 Semitic,  “How  long,  my  god?” 

6 Cf.  Ma-ad-i-li. 

7 Cf.  Ma-gu,  P.  K.  U.  N.,  p.  1356. 

8 Cf.  Lugal-md-gur-ri,  P.  K.  U.  N.,  p.  133a. 


88 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


dNi-e-dSe[S],  5:1. 

[Ar]i-iY-e,  104  : (i. 

AY /(-[  . . . ].  s.  of  Dumu-[  . . . ],  163  : 3. 

Ni-ne-za 

Xi-s[d(g)]-ga,1  114  : 14. 

Ni[_n-]gis-tig-a-an-ti,  142  : 1. 

[ . . }dNln-tu,  135  : 20. 

Xi-zi-zi,2  117  : 41. 

Xu-iir-i-D , (1)  95  :2S;  (2)  s.  of  Da-dt-l i,  11  : 2. 
Xu-sa-na-zi,  64  : 8. 

Y*ap-ni-mu  2 1 : 20. 

/?<-[  . . . ],  56:  4. 

. . ]-ru,  56  : 6. 

Ri-Kcilam-ba ,4  129  : 9. 

Ri-pi-pi,  120  : 4. 

R i-ug-ba ,5  23  : 9. 

S«<7-[  . . . ],  96  : 72. 

Sag-cla-na,  34  : 6. 

Sal-mah,  fern.,  153  : 3. 

Si-a-de,®  153  : 2. 

Sig-a-dA[d],  58  : 15. 

Stg-a-Ad-d[a],  57  : 5. 

Sir-ka,  s.  of  Za-an-me-ni ; br.  of  Gln-En-zu,  1:1. 
Sid-Ka-Ka,  (1)  110  : 30 ; (2)  f.  of  Dumu-nita-du,  110  : 5, 
6,  29. 

Su-sa-dIM  8 

Su-sci-ur(?)-ni,  f.  of  I-sar-ilu,  39  :seal. 

Sa-ab-Sa-a-ba,  108  : 2. 

Sa-bil-mu]  53  : 4. 

Sa(g)-gal-lu,  116  : 9. 

Sa-ma-ni,  118  : 3. 

Sa-mu-sa-ti,  56  : 7. 

Sa(m)-se-kin,  116  : 12. 

Sar-ru-um-l-Vi,  77  : 20. 

[ . . . ]-Se-Jia-ma , s.  of  Lu-[  . . . 57  : 10. 

Ses-da-da,  16  : 10. 

Ses-kal-la,  56  : 16;  135  : 6. 

Sim-du,  116  : 10. 

Sim-du-gur,  169  : 2. 

Sim-sd(g) , 116  : 10,  17. 

Su-ad-da ,9  110  : IX,  5. 

Su-dBE-lix0-li,  44  : 3. 


Su-dBil  -se-ga-dim-Sa , 44  : 3. 

Su-du(g)-ga-zi(d)-da,  15  : 7. 

Su-dDumu-zi,  (1)  16  : 4;  (2)  h.  of  Lugal-Bar,  125  : 7. 
Su-dEn-lil.  86  : 13. 

Su-galu-dRa,  110  : Y III,  2. 

Su-(g)is-dar,  56  : 22,  24,  42;  81  : 1 1 ; 96  : 51. 

Su-ni-dNam,  95  : 24. 

Su-dNin-safi,  s.  of  AY,  110  : IX,  2. 

Su-Sa-ra-ni,  f.  of  1-dim-dingir , 39  : seal. 

Su-u-la,  135  : 32. 

Su-ur-ra,  4:11. 

Ta-mu-bi-ti,  56  : 7. 

\J-bar,  160  : 12. 

U-bar-a-a,  103  : 25. 

(Jd-sA(g)-ga , 7:12. 

U-dun-[  . . ],  84  : 36. 

Uku-ne-mu,n  7:11. 

Usar-id ,12  127  : 11. 

XJ-ma-ni,  117  : .39. 
tl-sa-ag-Hm,  149  : 4. 
d Utu-ha-b[a\,  23  : 11. 
dUtu-ha-z[u],  130  : 8. 

U-li,  f.  of  [ . . . . ],  86  : 6. 
tl-na-ab-ku-in,  1 10  .:  X.  4. 

Ur-[  . . . ],  96  : 48,  63. 

Ur-d[  . . . ],  59  : 60;  96  : 47. 

Ur-a-dIM,  20  : 6. 

Ur-dAb-bar-ra,  43  : 3. 

Ur-An-na,  62  :seal. 

Ur-An-tu,  96  : 24. 

Ur-dAzag-sim,  41  : 3. 

Ur-dBa-u,  51  : 3. 

Ur-Dam,  58  : 9. 

Ur-d Da-mu,  7 : 5;  14  : 21. 

Ur-dDu,  br.  of  Ur-ki-Gu-la,  109  : 16. 

Ur-Dub,  96  : 58;  110  : XIII,  4. 

Ur-dul-du-e,  84  : 61 ; 106  : 2;  144  : 15. 

Ur-dDumu-zi[(d)-da],  14  : 7. 

Ur-d Dun-pa-e , (1)  22  : 4;  23  : 3;  24  : 3;  (2)  s.  of  Ur-dIM, 
79  : 37. 

Ur-E-an-na.  58  : 11. 

Ur-did-har-li-ba,  110  : VIII,  3. 

7 May  be  read  Kii. 

8 Cf.  Ku-za-zi,  T.  T .,  150,  I,  14. 

9 Cf.  Su-ad-da-mu , P.  K.  U.  N.,  p.  154a. 

10  By  mistake  of  scribe  written  se-ga. 

11  See  Kalam-ne-mu. 

12  May  be  name  of  field. 


1 Cf.  P.  K.  U.  N.,  p.  1415. 

2 See  t-zi-zi. 

3 Or  Kur-ni-rnu. 

4 Perhaps  to  be  read  Innanna-Kalam-ba  or  Innanna-ug-ba. 

5 See  Ri-Kalam-ba. 

6 See  Dir-de. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


89 


Ur-fi-gi-o , 1 : 16. 

Ur-e-dKa,  123  : 10. 

Ur-dEn-ki,  56  : 26;  120  : 2. 

Ur-dEn-lil,  96  : 32;  145  : 4. 

Ur-dE5-bar-ra,  43  : 3. 

Ur-dGdl-i[n?]-ka,  135  : 26. 

Ur-dGi-bil,  18  : 6. 

Ur-Gu(l),  96  :51. 

Ur-^a-ba-ba,'  83  : 25. 

Ur-Ib-al,  88  : 5;  111  : 6. 

Ur-dIgi-zi-bar-ra,  s.  of  Lul-a,  109  : 10. 

Ur-dIM , f.  of  U r-d  Dun-pd-'e , 79  : 37. 

Ur-dInnanna,  96  : 67. 

Ur-itu-Azag-ga,  95  : 1. 

Ur-itu-Mu,  f.  of  Ur-sag-ga,  87  : 10. 

Ur-dKal,  (1)  58  : 7;  136  : 2;  (2)  s.  of  Ni,  48  : 9; 
136  : 4. 

Ur-ki-dg,  56  : 12. 

Ur-kam,  135  : 12. 

Ur-ki-Gu-la,  (1)  123  : 2;  (2)  br.  of  Ur-dDu,  109  : 16. 
Ur-li,  113  : 3. 

Ur-li-de,  99  : 15. 

Ur-dLugal-[  . . . ],  110  : 5. 

Ur-dLugal,  s.  of  Da,  83  : 43;  84  : 83,  86. 

Ur-dLugal-banda,  84  : 86. 

Ur-dLugal-edin-na-ka,  134  : 7. 

Ur-Luh,  13  : 3;  56  : 36. 

[U]r-M  a-a-me , 108  : 4. 

Ur-ma-gi-a,  1 : 16;  95  : 19;  135  : 11. 

Ur-dMa-lum,  13  : 15. 

Ur-Ma-ma,  96  : 42. 

Ur-Me-me-e , 28  : 5. 

Ur-mu,  142  : 12. 

Ur-na-[  . . ],  102  : IV,  1. 

Ur-ni,  30  : 4. 

Ur-Nigin,  92  : 12;  96  ; 71. 


Ur-Nigin-gar,2  (1)  £4:5;  130:11;  134:11;  143:4; 

144  : 15;  (2)  f.  of  Ad-da,  110  : IX,  8. 

Ur-dNin-gis-[  . . . ],  152:  seal. 

Ur-dNin-t B,  82  : 5;  135  : 5,  8;  145  : 4. 

U r-d N in-ma-da , 96  : 38. 

Ur-d Nun-gal,  118  : 2. 

Ur-dPA.KU,  (1)  [ . . . ],  30  :2;(2)s.of  KA-ka,  14  5. 
Ur-d PA .KU-ra,  4 : 3;  8 : 2. 

Ur-Ra-a,  12  : 9. 

Ur-ra-kal,  69  : 1;  134  : 3. 

Ur-ra-ku-ra,  116  :8. 
fjr-ra-ni,  96  : 68. 

Ur-sib,  96  : 20. 

Ur-Si-gar,  118  : 7. 

Ur-sd(g)-ga,  (1)  [ . . . ],  111 : 4;  (2)  s.  of  Ur-itu-Mu,  87 : 9. 
Ur-dSe-ga,  s.  of  Ni-me-su,  58  : 13. 

Ur-dSu-An-[na],  57  : 4;  110  : 4. 

Ur-d Su-mah,  7 : 9. 

Ur-[  ....  Hi],  96  : 72. 

U[r-]dTi-u,ru,  135  : 27. 

Ur-Tum-al,  88  : 5. 

Ur-ud-mu,  f.  of  Ur-,  87  : 10. 

Ur-dUr-[  . . . ],  104  : 25. 

Ur-Zag(l) , 110:  VIII,  4. 
dUtu-bar-ra,  67  : 7. 
dUtu-ha-zu,  127  : 11. 

Utu-sd(g)-ga,  7 : 12. 

Us-a-ni,  1 : 19. 

Us-me-dNin-sa[h],  12  : 7. 

Z a-an-me-ni,  fem.,  m.  of  Sir-ka,  1 : 9. 

Zag-mu,  96  : 54,  69. 

Za-la-lum,  92  : 11. 

Za-?na-[  . . . ],  f.  of  A-ka[l ],  171  : 3. 

Za-ni-a,  117  : 36. 

Za-zi,  123  : 13. 

Zi-mu,  116  : 13. 


A -a: 

A-a-galu-ba,  119  : 7. 
A-a-gin-na(d) , 79  : 10. 
A-a-kal-la,  56  : 31. 
A-a-na-ib-e,  19  : 3. 
A-a-ni,  68  : 12. 
A-a-tu{r)-ra,  67  : 3. 
A-a-ur-mu,  81  : 10,  12. 


2.  Names  of  Gods. 

A-ab: 

A-ab-ga-mu,  16  : 6. 

dAb: 

Ab-ta-ab-'e,  95  : 20. 
Ur-dAb-bar-ra,  43  : 3. 

dAd: 

Slg-a-d A[d],  58  : 15.  . 


1 Cf.  d Ha-ab-ab , P.  K.  U . N .,  p.  174,  note  6. 
12 


2 Cf.  U r-d N igin-gar , P.  K.  U.  N.,  p.  127 a. 


90  SUMERIAN 

DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 

Ad-da: 

Ad-da-me,  110  : 24. 

Sig-a-A d-d[a~\,  57  : 5. 

A-ga: 

A-ga-ib,  135  : 14. 

Ama : 

Ama-ra,  120  : 10. 

An: 

An-galu-sag,  162  : 4. 

A-ba-An-da,  96  : 22. 

An-ni: 

95  : 30. 
d A pin: 

Kal-dA pin,  17  : 6. 
d Azag-sim : 

Ur-d  Azag-sim,  41:3 

Ur-dBa-u,  57  : 3. 

dBi: 

Galu-dBi,  109  : 9. 
dBi-li-li: 

Gir-d Bi-li-li,  56  : 46. 

Bil-la-lum: 

dEn-ki: 

d E n-ki-im-du , 111  : 2. 

Ur-dEn-ki,  56  : 26. 
dEn-lil: 

En-lU-da-ner-gal,  86  : 14. 

A-ba-d E n-lil , 96  : 19. 

Ad-dEn-lil , 84  : 88. 

Galu-d En-lil-ld,  111  : 9. 

Gir-dEn-lil-gal,  52  : 3. 

Jgi-dE n-lil,  95  : 21 ; 135  : 19. 

[ . . . ]-En-lil-rnu,  164  : 4. 
dEn-zu: 

Galu-dEn-zu,  41  : 6;  56  : 15;  160  : 4 

G\ndEn-zu,  1 : 10. 
dG  61: 

U r-dGdl-i n ( ?)-ka , 135  : 26. 
dGestin: 

Gu(d)-dGestin-an,  102  : 3. 
dGi-bil: 

Ur-dGi-bil , 18  : 6. 

(G)  is-dar: 

Su-(g)is-dar,  56  : 22;  81  : 11 . 

Gu-la: 

A-Bil-la-lum,  24  : 5. 

A-Bil-la-lum-ma,  79  : 33. 

Qu-ma-Gu-la,  87  : 2. 

Ha; 

dBil-lil-li 

Su-d Bil-li-li , 44  : 3. 

Ur-Qa-ba-ba,  83  : 25. 

dlB: 

dDci-gan: 

In  date  formulas. 

Da  m : 

Ur-Dam,  58  : 9. 
d Da-mu: 

Ur d Da-mu,  7 : 5;  14  : 21 

Gain  d Da-mu,  70  : 10. 

d Du: 

Ur-dDu,  109  : 16. 

A-ga-IB(l),  135  : 4. 

[ . . . ]-dI[B],  148  : 9. 

dIgi: 

dIgi-du,  144  : 8. 

Ur-dIgi-zi-bar-ra,  109  : 9. 

dU\: 

Da-df-li,  11:2. 
dlM: 

Ur-dIM,  79  : 37. 

d Du  mu: 

Innanna: 

E-mul-dDumu,  111  : 5. 
d Dumu-zi: 

Su-dDumu-zi,  16  : 4. 
dDun-gi: 

itu  Ezen-dDun-gi,  passim. 
d Dun-pa-'e : 

B ur-za-Innanna, 

Galu-za-I nnanna , 

Ka-dInnanna,  110  : IX,  00. 
rfK  a: 

Galu-dLufi-dKa,  104  : 7. 

Kal: 

Ur-d Dun-pa-e , 22  : 4;  23  : 3;  24  : 3;  79  : 37.  Ur-dKal,  48  : 9 


YZngar: 

A-bil-Engar,  139  : 6. 

dKal-la: 

A-mur-dKal-la,  116  : 11. 

1 Written  se-ga,  but  scribe  probably  omitted  the  last  perpendicular  wedge,  making  the  last  part  of  the  sign  ga 
instead  of  sa.  Probably  the  same  name,  i.e,,  dBe-li-U, 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


Gar-Kal-la,  47  : 3. 

Ku: 

Igi-Ku 87  : 4. 
d Liagab  + sig : 

Galu-d Lcigab  + sig , 104  : 31;  121  : 13. 
Li: 

Ur-Li,  113  : 3. 
dLugal: 

LJr-dLugal,  110  : 5. 
d Lugal-banda: 

Ur-dLugal-banda,  84  : 86. 
d Luga  l-N  am-tar-ri: 

Title  for  Nin-tB,  133  : 5. 
dLuh: 

Galud LuhJ^Ka , 104  : 7. 
dLu-sd(g): 

[ . . . ]-dLu  -sa(g),  149  : 5. 
a-lum: 

Ur-dMa-lum,  13  : 15. 
dMe-ki-gdl: 

itu-dMe-ki-gdl,  81  : 13. 
d Mu: 

[ . . . -]dMu-ba-azag,  135  : 12. 
dSam: 

Su-ni-dNam,  95  : 24. 
dNanna: 

In  dates,  14  : 25,  et  passim. 
dNe-su: 

itu-dNe-su,  54  : 7;  134  : 12,  etc. 
Nigin: 

Ur-Nigin,  134  : 11. 

Ur-Nigin-gar,  54  : 5;  110  : IX,  8. 
dNin-a-zu: 

itu-dNin-a-zu,  17  : 9,  etc. 
dNin-gis: 

Ur-dNin-gis,  152  : seal. 
dNin-gul: 

Galu-dN in-gal,  58  : 12. 


dNin-tB: 

Ur-d Nin-tB,  82  : 5;  135  : 5,  8. 
dNin-lil: 

In  dates,  2 : 22,  et  passim. 
d N in-safi  : 

su-dN in-safi,  1 10  : IX,  2. 

Us-me-dN in-safi , 12  : 7. 
dNin-tu: 

[ . . . ]-dNin-tu,  135  : 20. 
dNun-gal: 

Ur-d Nun-gal,  118  : 2. 
dPA.KU: 

TJr-dPA.KU,  3 : 1;  14  : 5;  15  : 4;  30 

Galu-dRa,  124  : 7. 

Ur-Ra-a,  12  : 9. 
d&ag: 

[Ga\lu  {Lugal'I)-d Sag , 12  : 12. 
dSes: 

A n-ni-dSes,  5:1. 
dSig: 

Galu-dSig,  151:  29. 

Si-gar: 

Ur-Si-gar,  118  : 7. 
dSu-an-na: 

Ur-dSu-an-na,  57  : 4;  110  : 4. 
dSu-mafi: 

Ur-dSu-mah,  7 : 9. 
dTisfiu: 

Nita-dTisfiu ,1 2  93:  seal. 

Ur: 

dUr-ra-Kal,  134  : 3. 
dUr: 

Ur-dUr,  104  : 25. 
dUtu: 

Galu-dUtu , 13  : 4. 

Lugal-dUtu,  13  :seal;  52  : 12. 


3.  Names  of  Countries  and  Cities. 

A n-$a-anki,  100  : 17,  56,  71,  79;  114  : 19;  136  : 22;  140:  Ua-ar-si(sum)ki , 83  : 46;  156  : 10,  etc. 

12;  142  : 15.  gu-}ru-nu-riki , 4 : 16;  8 : 8,  etc. 

Ba-si-me ki,3  77  : 21.  JJ u-rnur-likl , dates. 

G an-Karkl,  100  : 9,  49,  etc.  I n-si-klna,  120  : 13. 

Gir-zukl,  136  : 17,  20.  K ar-zi(d)-daki , 14  : 25,  etc. 

Gis-huk\  61  : 3;  136  : 19.  Ki-maski 

1 Qi.dKU,  Br.  10569.  2 Or  Ur-dTi%u. 

3 (jf_  &luBa-li-mu,  Assurbanapal,  Rassam  Inscription,  col.  V,  17. 


92 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


Tuu-lu-biki 

'Sibru  (. En-lil H),  9G  : 46,  etc. 

S i-ma-numki,  48  : 8. 

Si-mu-ru-umr1 , 7 : 14,  etc. 

U -bi\  104  : 38. 

4.  Names  of  1 

fi-a-ku-[u.  102:  12. 

E-a-ni,  151 : 37. 
fj-nn-na, 

Ur-^-an-na,  58:  11. 

E-azag, 

Ur-E-azag-ga,  109:24. 

E-dEn-lil-ld , 131:  3. 

E-gal,  71:  12,  16. 

5.  Names 

itu  Ab-e,  63:  6;  65:  5;  95:  2. 
itu  A-ki-ti,  116:  20. 
itu  Amar-a-zi,  152:5. 

ituAH-a),  8:7;  11:16;  56:45;  87:13;  111:13;  131:5. 
itu  Azag-sim,  15:  17;  42:8;  48:7. 

itu  Bdr-zag-gar-ra,  4:14;  18:  11;  40:  10;  44:  6;  117 : 11,  64. 
itu  Bil-bil-gar-ra,  126:30;  163:4. 

■itu  Da,  Lugal-itu-Da,  14:  12. 
itu  Dul-azag,  85:9;  128:  13. 
itu  Dir-Se-kin-kud,  2:  18. 

itu  Engar-du-a,  23:  9;  24:7;  25:9;  37:11;  135:34. 
itu  Ezen-An-na,  34:  8. 

itu  Ezen-dDun-gi,  136:18;  156:9;  104:33;  157:9. 
itu  Ezen-dMe-ki-gdl,  81:13;  93:  9. 
itu  Ezen-dNin-a-zu,  9:11;  17:  9;  32:  7 
itu  Gdn-gdn-'e,  22:8;  47:  5;  129:  14. 


U-bilki,  59  : 13. 

Ur-bil-lumkl,  15  : 19,  etc. 

Unu(g)kl,  22  : 9,  etc. 

Uru-unu(g)kl,  14  : 25,  etc. 

Z u-ab-sa-li^ , 21  : 21,  et  passim. 

jEs  and  Houses. 

E-gal-la,  64:  6. 

E-kur-ra,  3S:  3. 

E-mu-ta,  68:  5. 

E-nigin-gar-ra,  165:  19. 

E-nun,  68:  5. 

E-les-kal,  165:21. 

E-ii-ku,  60:  3. 

’ Months. 

itu  Gu{d)-si-zu,  16:12;  117:63;  130:14;  135:3. 
itu  Kin-d Innanna,  117 : 43. 
itu  Ki-s\g-dN in-a-zu , 45:  7. 
itu  Mu, 

Ur-itu-Mu,  87:  10. 
itu  Mu-lu-ul,  136:  20. 
itu  Ne-su,  35:6;  54:,7;  134:  12. 
itu  Pap  + e[.  . .],  143:  7. 
itu  Sig,  13:  16;  49:7;  88:  17. 

itu  Se-kin-kud,  1:22;  14:24;  28:  7;  29:  6;  31:  7;  79:  38; 

80:6;  93:8;  100:55, 78;  117:55;  153:4; 158:6; 
159:3. 

itu  Se-sag-kud,  100:78. 

itu  Su-kul(-a),  21 : 20;  60:  4;  62:  8;  75:  19;  117:42. 
itu  Su-sa-es,  46:  14. 
itu  Su-se-ku[l],  53:  6. 


6.  Officials  and  Employes  . 


nb-ku,  106  : 3,  5. 
al-sd(ag)  ? 14  : 3. 
ilam-qar,  56  : 45;  146  : 14,  etc. 
di-kud,  14  : 8. 

dub-sar,  29  : seal ; 96  : 48,  60 ; 120  : 4. 

de,  96  : 68,  70,  73. 

dim?,  Ill  : 11. 

engar,  96  : 17. 

galu-kin-gi-a 

galu-ku-ma,  94  : 2;  117  : 34. 
galu-sig-a,  136  : 9;  136  : 11,  12. 
galu-Hm,  127  : 2. 
gin,  120  : 2,  etc. 


gir,  96  : 22;  120  : 2,  6,  7,  14;  126  : 7;  128  : 9,  etc. 
gir-ra 

gir-si(g)-ga,  141  : 7,  etc. 
gu-za-lal,  135  : 7. 

\i.a-su-gab,  116  : 17. 
kud-dim,  96  : 40. 

1(4,  96  : 10;  111  : 6; 133  : 10. 
lul,  96  : 22. 
lul-a,  109. 
m d-dub-ba 

md-du-du,  96  : 42;  100  : 89. 
ma-ra-ad,  116  : 8. 
maikim,  48  : 12. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


93 


mu,  15  : 6;  23  : 3. 
ni-gab,  88:  5. 
ni-ku,  88  : 5,  etc. 
ni-ku-es,  81  : 11 
nu-banda,  86  : 15. 
nu-banda-gu (d) , 102  : 3. 
nu-banda-lugal-me-ne , 86  : 15. 
nu-dug-as,  115  : 6. 
nu-ki-sar,  98  : 4,  5. 
nu-har,  71  : 12,  16. 
pa,  96  : 69,  etc. 


pa-al,  3 : 12. 
na-isib , 2:1. 
pa-us-bar-ge,  55  : 13. 
Sal  + me,  20  : 10,  11. 
sib,  21  : 17;  96  : 16,  21. 
sib  gir,  96:  13. 

Sim  + gar,  96  : 4. 
Sii(g)-gi,  96  : 12. 
wkuh-nita,  3 : 12. 
us-ku-gu-la , 96  : 57. 


XI. 


DESCRIPTION  OF  TAPPETS 


Abbreviations. 

C.B.M.,  Catalogue  of  the  Babylonian  Museum,  University  of  Pennsylvania,  prepared  by  Prof.  Hilpreclit;  col., 
column;  inscr.,  inscription;  L.  E.,  Left  Edge;  li.,  lines;  E.  Lo.  C.,  Left  Lower  Corner;  Lo.  1*.,  Lower  Part; 
E.  S.,  Left  Side;  I..  U.  C.,  Left  Upper  Corner;  O.,  Obverse;  R.,  Reverse;  Ri.  E.,  Right  Edge;  Ri.  Lo.  C., 
Right  Lower  Corner;  Ri.  S.,  Right  Side;  If.  E.,  Upper  Edge;  U.  1*.,  Upper  Part. 

The  Roman  numbers  refer  to  the  different  expeditions  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania  sent  out  to  Nippur. 
Measurements  are  given  in  centimetres,  leng  th  (height)  X width  X thickness. 

Tablets  reproduced  both  in  autograph  and  halftone  are  indicated  by  a bold  number  in  the  first  column. 


1.  Autograph  Reproductions. 


Text.  Plate.  King. 

1 1 Gimil-Sin 


Gimil-Sin 


3 3 Bur-Sin 


4 3 Bur-Sin 


5 3 


6 3 


Year. 


5 


6 


8 


7 


Month.  Day. 
S e-ki  n-k  ud  20  ( ?) 


Dir-Se- 

kin-kud 


1 25 


C.B.M.  Description. 

11176  Baked.  Brown.  Well  preserved,  only  a 

few  small  pieces  chipped  off  on  O.  8.7 
X 5.3  X 1.9.  Inscr.  12  (O.)  + 12  (R.) 
= 24.  Ruled.  I.  Court  'proceedings.  See 
Translation  I. 

11574  Baked.  Bright  brown,  darkened  on  R. 

Pretty  well  preserved.  L.  Lo.  C.  chipped 
off.  8.3  X 5.2  X 2.  Inscr.  10  (0.)  X 1 
(Lo.  E.)  + S (R.)  + 3 (U.  E.)  = 22  li. 
Not  ruled.  II.  Court  proceedings.  See 
Translation  II. 

12576  Baked.  Light  brown,  darkened.  Lower 
part  broken  off.  4.3  X 4 X 1.5.  Inscr. 
6 (0.)  + 2 (R.)  = 8 li.  Ruled.  III. 
Contract. 

10480  Baked.  Grayish  brown.  Lo.  L.  C.  broken 

off.  4.8  X 3.9  X 1.8.  Inscr.  7 (O.)  + 
10  (R.)  = 17  li.  Ruled.  III.  Court  pro- 
ceedings. 

11407  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Fragment  of  case. 

3.7  X 3.9  X 0.4.  Inscr.  3 li.  Not  ruled. 
Traces  of  seal  impressions.  I.  Contract. 
11224  Baked.  Yellowish  brown.  Fairly  well 


[94] 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


95 


King. 

Year. 

Month. 

Day. 

C.B.M. 

Dungi 

35 

11572 

Bur-Sin 

7 

11 

14 

12577 

Gimil-Sin 

8 

Azag-sim 

5 

3412 

3403 


Bur-Sin  5 11  11  10156 


Gimil-Sin  8 3 


Dungi  46  Se-kin-kud  5136 


Description. 

preserved.  3.2  X 2.8  X 2.  Inscr.  2 li. 
Ruled.  II.  Memorandum. 

Baked.  Dark  brown.  Tablet  well  pre- 
served. 6.7  X 4.6  X 1.8.  Inscr.  7 (0.) 
+ 9 (R.)  = 16  li.  Not  ruled.  Covered 
with  seal  impressions  which  mar  the 
writing.  II.  Bond. 

Baked.  Dark  brown.  Fragmentary.  3.2 
X 9.9  X 1.2.  Inscr.  5 (O.)  + 1 (U.  E.) 
+ 2 (L.  E.)  = 8 li.  Ruled.  III.  Frag- 
ment of  a document  of  sale  (?). 

Slightly  baked.  Yellowish  white.  Frag- 
mentary, badly  preserved.  4.7  X 4.1  X 
1.7.  Inscr.  6 (O.)  + 7 (R.)  = 13  li. 
Not  ruled.  II.  Contract. 

Baked.  Blackish  brown.  Two  pieces 
joined.  Small  pieces  chipped  off. 

3.8  X 3.8  X 1.1.  Inscr.  4 (0.)  + 5 (R.) 
= 9 li.  Not  ruled.  Faint  traces  of 
seal  impressions,  which  partly  mar  the 
writing.  II.  Contract  in  regard  to  a 
plantation. 

Case  tablet,  found  unopened.  Tablet: 
Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Well  pre- 
served, only  a few  signs  being  damaged. 

5.2  X 4.5  X 1.6.  Inscr.  8 (O.)  + 10  (R.) 
= 18  li.  Ruled.  III.  Promissory  note. 

Case:  Baked.  Light  brown.  R.  broken. 

6.2  X 4,2  X 2.2.  Inscr.  5 (O.)  + 2 (R.) 
= 7 li.  Traces  of  seal  impressions. 

10492  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Fragmentary. 

6 X 4.1  X 1.8.  ' Inscr.  8 (O.)  4-  6 (R.) 
= 14  li.  Ruled.  III.  “Contract.” 

3593  Case  tablet,  found  unopened.  Tablet: 

Dull  brown.  Pieces  of  L.  E.  broken 
off.  5.S  X 4.2  X 1.  Inscr.  S (O.)  X 9 
(R.)  + 2 (U.  E.)  4-  2 (L.  E.)  = 21  li. 
Ruled.  I.  Promissory  note.  See  Trans- 
lation. 

Case:  Baked.  Dark  brown.  Lo.  part  of 
L.  E.  and  L.  comer  broken  off.  R.  E. 
cracked,  pieces  fallen  away.  7.5  X 5.3 
X 3.1.  Inscr.  9 (0.)  4-  8 (R.)  4-  1 (L.  E.) 
= 18  li.  Covered  with  seal  impressions, 
14  in  number,  which  mar  the  writing. 
Baked.  Brown.  Two  pieces  joined.  11  X 

5.9  X 2.8.  Inscr.  15  (0.)  + 8 (R.)  = 
23  li.  Ruled.  Beautiful  seal  impres- 


96 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


Text. 


15 


16 


17 


18 


19 


20 


21 


oo 


Plate.  King.  Year.  Month.  Day. 


9 Bur-Sin  2 Amg-Um  9 


9 I -bi-Sin  1 


9 Dungi  35  6 


10  Bur-Sin  5 1 


10 


10 


11  Gimil-Sin  7 4 30 


11  Dungi  53  9 


C.B.M.  Description. 

sion  on  R.  III.  Purchase  of  palm, 
grove.  See  Translation. 

10776  Baked.  Darkened  light  brown.  Three 
pieces  joined.  Lo.  part  of  O.  and  L.  E. 
broken  off.  9.5  X 4.8  X 2.1.  Inscr.  11 
(O.)  + 4 (R.)  = 15  li.  Ruled.  Seal 
impressions  on  R.  III.  Purchase  oj  a 
male  slave.  See  Translation. 

12575  Baked.  Reddish  brown,  darkened  in 
places.  Well  preserved,  only  small  pieces 
of  R.  chipped  off.  4 X 3.5  X 1.3.  Inscr. 
5 (O.)  + 7 (R.)  + 2 (U.  E.)  = 14  li. 
Ruled.  III.  Acknowledgment  of  the  re- 
ceipt of  the  price  for  a pair  of  slaves.  See 
Translation. 

11665  Baked.  Black.  Greater  part  of  O.  broken 
off.  4.9  X 3.9  X 1.5.  Inscr.  4 (O.) 
X 7 (R.)  = 11  li.  Not  ruled.  Covered 
with  traces  of  seal  impressions.  II. 
Loan  of  silver.  Value  received. 

3411  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Two  pieces  joined. 

Pieces  of  R.  chipped  off.  4.1  X 3.5 
X 1,8.  Inscr.  5 (O.)  + 6 (R.)  + 2 
(U.  E.)  + 2 (L.  E.)  = 15  li.  Ruled.  II. 
Loan  of  silver.  Value  received. 

10932  Baked.  Darkened  brown.  L.  U.  C.  and 
most  of  R.  broken  off.  4.5  X 4.1  X 1.4. 
Inscr.  7 (O.)  +5  (R.)  + 1 (U.  E.)  = 
13  li.  Ruled.  Originally  dated:  III. 
Loan  of  silver.  Value  received. 

11197  Baked.  Dull  brown.  Fragmentary.  6.1  X 

4.3  X 1.5.  Inscr.  10  (O.)  + 2 (R.)  = 

12  li.  Ruled.  II.  Loan  of  silver.  Value 
received. 

11575  Baked.  Light  brown.  Crumbling,  mostly 
illegible.  9 X 4.7  X 1 .9.  Inscr.  15  (O.) 
+ 8 (R.)  = 23  li.  Ruled.  Traces  of 

seal  impressions.  II.  Document  of  sale. 

3422  Case  tablet.  Tablet:  Baked.  Reddish 

brown,  darkened  in  places.  Pieces  of 

surface  of  sides  and  edges  chipped  off. 
4.6  X 4 X 2.  Inscr.  5 (O.)  + 4 (R.) 

= 9 li.  Ruled.  II.  Loan  of  silver. 

Value  received. 

Case:  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Fragmen- 
tary, only  part  of  R.  remaining.  5.6 
X 5.6  X 1.1.  Inscr.  3 li.  Covered  with 
traces  of  seal  impressions. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


97 


Text.  Plate.  King. 
23  12  Dungi 


24  12  Dungi 


25  12  Gimil-Sin 


26  12 


27  13 


28  13 


29  13  Bur-Sin 


30  13  Dungi 


31  14 


32  14  Bur-Sin 


Year.  Month.  Day. 
35  8 19 


35  8 18 


7 8 


Se-kin-kud  19 


5 Se-kin-kud 


41 


Se-kin-kud  1 


9 6 


C.B.M.  Description. 

3378  Baked.  Light  brown.  Well  preserved, 
only  small  piece  of  U.  Ri.  C.  chipped  off. 
4 X 3.5  X 2.2.  Inscr.  6 (0.)  + 4 (R.) 
= 10  li.  Not  ruled.  Traces  ot'  seal 
impressions  on  sides  and  edges.  II. 
Loan  of  grain.  Value  received. 

11579  Baked.  Light  brown.  Well  preserved. 

4.3  X 3.7  X 2.1.  Inscr.  6 (0.)  + 4 
(R.)  = 10  li.  Not  ruled.  Faint  traces 
of  seal  impressions.  II.  Loan  of  grain. 
Value  received. 

11587  Baked.  Brown,  darkened.  Cracked,  glued, 
small  pieces  wanting.  3.8  X 3.5  X 1.3. 
Inscr.  4 (0.)  + 5 (R.)  + 2 (U.  E.) 
+ 1 (L.  E.)  = 12  li.  Not  ruled.  Cov- 
ered with  traces  of  seal  impressions.  II. 
Loan  of  grain.  Value  received. 

3398  Baked.  Light  brown.  R.  broken  away. 

3.9  X 3.9  X 1.1.  Inscr.  5 fO.)  + 1 
(L.E.)  = 6 li.  Not  ruled.  Faint  traces 
of  seal  impressions.  Originally  dated. 
II.  Loan  of  grain.  Value  received. 

3394  Baked.  Light  brown.  Lo.  part  of  R. 

chipped  off.  4.2  X 3.8  X 1.4.  Inscr.  5 
(O.)  + 3 (R.)  =8  li.  Not  ruled. 
Covered  with  traces  of  seal  impressions, 
which  mar  the  writing.  Originally  dated. 
II.  Loan  of  grain.  Value  received. 

3400  Baked.  Blackish  brown  U.  L.  C.  and 
Lo.  part  of  R.  broken  off.  4.5  X 3.7 
X 1.4.  Inscr.  7 (O.)  + 1 (R.)  = 8 li. 
Not  ruled.  Part  of  date  broken  off. 
Covered  with  seal  impressions.  II.  Loan 
of  grain.  Value  received. 

10240  Baked.  Reddish  light  brown.  Well  pre- 
served. 4 X 3.4  X 1.2.  Inscr.  4 (O.) 
+ 4 (R.)  = 8 li.  Not  ruled.  Covered 
with  seal  impressions  which  partly  mar 
the  writing.  III.  Receipt  of  silver. 

10439  Baked.  Pale  brown.  U.  E.  broken  off.  3.8  X 
3,5  X 2.5.  Inscr.  5 (O.)  + 2 (R.)  = 7 li. 
Ruled.  III.  Receipt  of  grain. 

11212  Baked.  Dark  brown.  Lo.  L.  C.  of  R, 
broken  off.  3.8  X 3.2  X 1.8.  Inscr.  6 
(O.)  + 3 (R.)  = 9 li.  Ruled.  II. 
Loan  of  dates. 

1124  Case.  Blackened  brown.  Broken  and 

joined.  Greater  part  of  O.  wanting. 


13 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


King. 


Bur-Sin 


Dungi 


Bur  Sin 


Bur-Sin 


Gimil-Sin 


Gimil-Sin 


Ibi-Sin 


Bur-Sin 


Bur- Sin 


Yeah. 


9 


41 


3 


? 


? 


5 


Month  . 


3 


8 


6 


10 


Day. 


7 


C.R.M.  Description. 

4.7  X 4 X 2.3.  Inscr.  6 (O.)  + 3 (R.) 
= 9 li.  Covered  with  seal  impressions. 
II.  Receipt  of  grain. 

11256  Baked.  Dark  brown.  Part  of  R.  chipped 
off.  3.8  X 3.3  X 1.7.  Inscr.  6 (O.) 

+ 1 (R.)  = 10  li.  Ruled.  II.  Receipt 
of  corn,  etc. 

11259  Baked.  Pale  brown.  Cracked  and  small 
pieces  broken  off.  3.6  X 3.2  X 1.6. 
Inscr.  6 (0.)  -f-  3 (R.)  = 9 li.  Ruled. 
II.  Receipt  of  corn. 

3389  Baked.  Light  brown.  Pieces  of  R.  chipped 
off.  2.9  X 2.S  X 1.2.  Inscr.  1 (O.) 

+ 6 (R.)  = 10  li.  Ruled.  II.  Receipt 
of  grain. 

10253  Case  tablet.  Tablet:  Baked.  Black.  Pretty 
well  preserved.  3.5  X 3 X 1.4.  Inscr.  5 
(O.)  + 7 (R.)  = 12  li.  Ruled.  III. 
Receipt  of  wheat. 

Case:  Baked.  Black.  Two  fragments. 

O.,  4.8  X 2.3  X 1.6.  Inscr.  4 li.  R., 
5.3  X 4 X 0.8.  Inscr.  5 li.  Traces  of 
seal  impressions. 

11667  Baked.  Reddish  brown,  darkened.  L.  side 
of  R.  chipped  off.  3.7  X 3.5  X 1.6. 
Inscr.  5 (0.)  + 6 (R.)  + 1 (U.  E.) 

+ 1 (L.  E.)  — 13  li.  Not  ruled. 

Covered  with  traces  of  seal  impressions. 

II.  List  of  receipts  of  grain. 

1 1583  Baked.  Blackened  brown.  R.  broken  off. 

4.2  X 4.1  X 1.3.  Inscr.  4 li.  Not  ruled. 
Traces  of  seal  impressions  with  name  of 
Gimil-Sin.  II.  Receipt  of  corn. 

3399  Baked.  Blackened  brown.  Ri.  Lo.  C.  of 
O.  broken  off.  4.4  X 3.8  X 1.7.  Inscr. 
5 (O.)  + 5 (R.)  = 10  li.  Not  ruled. 

Covered  with  seal  impressions.  II. 
Receipt  of  corn. 

10256  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Well  preserved. 

4.7  X 4 X 1.  Inscr.  5 (0.)  + 7 (R.) 
= 12  li.  Not  ruled.  Covered  with  seal 
impressions  which  partly  mar  the  writing. 

III.  Receipt  of  grain. 

10424  Baked.  Pale  brown,  darkened  in  places. 

Cracked.  4.5  X 3.8  X 1.1.  Inscr.  5 
(0.)  + 4 (R.)  = 9 li.  Not  ruled.  Faint 
traces  of  seal  impressions.  III.  Receipt 
of  grain. 


liA'l 

17 

17 

17 

17 

IS 

18 

18 

19 

19 

19 

20 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


99 


King. 

Bur-Sin 


Dungi 


Bur-Sin 


Dungi 


Bur-Sin 


Gimil-Sin 


Gimil-Sin 


? 

I bi-Sin 


Year.  Month.  Day. 

G Azag-[-sim] 


36  1 


9 5 


38  9 


5 9 20 


3 A zag-sim 


5 


1 1 


10  IS 


C.B.M.  Description. 

10242  Baked.  Light  reddish  brown.  Small  pieces 
chipped  off.  4.1  X 3.8  X 1.3.  Inscr. 

6 (O.)  + 4 (R.)  = 10  li.  Not  ruled. 

Faint  traces  of  seal  impressions.  III. 
Receipt  of  grain. 

11214  Baked.  Dark  brown.  R.  broken  off. 

Parts  of  writing  on  O.  illegible.  3.1  X 3 
X 1.5.  Inscr.  5 li.  Ruled.  II.  Receipt 
of  corn. 

115S6  Baked.  Light  brown.  Well  preserved. 

2.8  X 2.6  X 1.3.  Inscr.  4 (O.)  + 6 

(R.)  =10  li.  Ruled.  II.  Receipts  of 
beans. 

11193  Case  tablet  with  fragments  of  case.  Tablet: 

Baked.  Dark  brown.  Cracked,  but 
fairly  well  preserved.  3.3  X 3 X 1.6. 
Inscr.  6 (O.)  + 5 (R.)  = 11  li.  Partly 
ruled.  II.  Receipt  of  corn  and  beans. 
10230  Case  tablet  with  O.  of  case.  Tablet; 

Baked.  Darkened  brown.  Pretty  well 
preserved.  3.2  X 2.8  X 1.3.  Inscr.  6 
(O.)  + 7 (R.)  + 2 (L.E.)  = 15.  Ruled. 
III.  Receipt  of  provisions. 

3374  Baked.  U.  L.  C.  broken  off.  3.6  X 3.7 
X 1.2.  Inscr.  4 (O.)  + 4 (R.)  = 8 li. 

Not  ruled.  Traces  of  seal  impressions. 
II.  Receipt  of  vegetables. 

3373  Baked.  Pale  brown.  Fairly  well  preserved . 

3 X 3.3  X 1.  Inscr.  5 (O.)  + 3 (R.) 

= 8 li.  Not  ruled.  Seal  impressions  on 
R.,  partly  illegible.  II.  Receipt  of  straw. 
3388  Baked.  Light  brown,  darkened  hi  places. 

L.  E.;  Ri.  E.  and  L.  Lo.  C.  broken  off. 
4.4  X 4.4  X 1.2.  Inscr.  6 (O.)  + 6 

(R.)  = 12  li.  Not  ruled.  Covered  with 
seal  impressions.  II.  Receipt  of  ku-mafi. 
11585  Baked.  Pale  brown.  U.  Ri.  C.  broken  off. 

4.2  X 4 X 1.2.  Inscr.  5 (O.)  + 5 (R.)  = 
10  li.  Not  ruled.  II.  Receipt  of  ku-mafi. 
3383  Baked.  Light  brown,  blackened  in  places. 

Cracked.  Two  pieces  joined.  U.  E. 
and  U.  L.  E.  broken  off.  Part  of  surface 
of  R.  chipped  off.  3.8  X 3.1  X 1.2. 
Inscr.  6 (O.)  + 6 (R.)  = 12  li.  Ruled. 
II.  Receipt  of  ku-mah. 

3391  Baked.  Light  brown.  Fragmentary.  3.9 
X 3.2  X 1.2.  Inscr.  6 (O.)  + 3 (R.) 

= 9 li.  Ruled.  II.  Receipt  of  ku-mafi. 


100 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


Text.  Plate.  King. 
53  20 


54  20  Bur-Sin 


55  20  Bur-Sin 


56  21  Dungi 


57  22  Dungi 


53  22  Bur-Sin 


59  23  Bur-Sin 


60  23  Bur-Sin 


61  23  Gimil-Sin 


62  23  Gimil-Sin 


Year. 

Month. 

Su-eS-kul 

Day. 

15 

C.B.M. 

11581 

9 

3 

11216 

1 

10765 

53 

11 

30  (?) 

11661 

35 

10 

11185 

9 

1 1566 

9 

6 

11203 

9 

4 

3397 

4 and  5 

11255 

1 

4 

23 

11110 

Description. 

Baked.  Light  brown.  Cracked.  Pieces 
fallen  out.  4.1  X 3.5  X 0.9.  Inscr.  6 
(O.)  + 1 (II.)  = 7 li.  Ruled.  Traces 

of  seal  impressions  on  R.  II.  Receipt 
of  ku-rnah. 

Baked.  Dark  brown.  Well  preserved,  only 
small  pieces  of  O.  chipped  off.  3.8  X 
3.5  X 1.8.  Inscr.  6 (O.)  + 3 (R.)  = 

9 li.  Ruled.  II.  Receipt  of  figs. 

Baked.  Light  brown.  LL  E.  of  O.  broken 

away,  and  small  pieces  chipped  off.  5.8 
X 4.2  X 2.  Inscr.  9 (O.)  + 9 (R.) 

= 18  li.  Ruled.  III.  Receipt  of  various 
objects. 

Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Large  pieces 
broken  off.  9.8  X 6.8  X 2.3.  Inscr.  17 
(col.  I)  + 18  (col.  II)  + 13  (col.  Ill) 
+ 1 (col.  IV)  = 49  li.  Writing  partly 
effaced  on  R.  Ruled.  II.  Account  of 
grain  paid  out. 

Baked.  Blackened  reddish  brown.  Frag- 
mentary, badly  preserved  and  crumbling. 

10  X 4.9  X 2.6.  Inscr.  16  (O.)  + 10 
(R.)  = 26  li.  Ruled.  II.  Account  of 
grain  received  (?). 

Baked.  Dark  brown.  Two  pieces  joined. 
Most  of  O.  broken  off.  7 X 4.3  X 1.8. 
Inscr.  6 (O.)  + 9 (R.)  + 1 (L.  E.) 

= 16  li.  Ruled.  II.  Receipt  of  grain 
received  and  paid  out. 

Baked.  Yellowish  brown,  blackened  on 
O.  Upper  P.  of  O.  broken  off.  Two 
pieces  joined.  5.7  X 4.3  X 1.8.  Inscr.  9 
(O.)  + 7 (R.)  = 16  li.  Ruled.  II. 
Account  of  grain  received. 

Baked.  Pale  brown.  Two  pieces  joined. 
Small  pieces  chipped  off  on  R.  3.5  X 3 
X 1.3.  Inscr.  4 (O.)  + 3 (R.)  = 7 li. 
Ruled.  II.  Statement  in  regard  to  grain 
at  hand. 

Baked.  Light  brown,  blackened.  Frag- 
ment. 5 X 3.9  X 0.7.  Inscr.  7 li. 
Ruled.  II.  “Account.” 

Baked.  Dark  brown.  Pretty  well  pre- 
served. 5.4  X 4.5  X 1.3.  Inscr.  6 (O.) 
+ 5 (R.)  = 11  li.  Not  ruled.  Covered 
with  seal  impressions,  which  mar  the 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


101 


Text. 

Plate. 

King. 

Year. 

Month. 

Day 

63 

24 

Gimil-Sin 

1 

10 

64  24  Dungi  47 


65  24  Gimil-Sin  10 


66  24 


67  25 


6S  25 


69  25 


70 


71  26 


72  26 


73  26 


74  26 


O.B.M.  Description. 

writing.  II.  Account  of  chairs  received 
and  at  hand. 

11582  Baked.  Light  brown,  darkened  in  places. 

Several  pieces  joined.  Small  pieces  want- 
ing. 3.5  X 3.5  X 1.2.  Inscr.  5 (O.)  + 3 
(R.)  = 8 li.  Not  ruled.  Covered  with 
traces  of  seal  impressions.  II  Statement 
of  ku-rnah  at  hand. 

11220  Baked.  Yellowish  brown.  Varnished.  Well 
preserved.  3.7  X 3.5  X 1.7.  Inscr. 
6 (0.1  + 5 (R.)  = 11  li.  Ruled.  II. 
Account  of  grain. 

11591  Baked.  Darkened  brown.  Cracked.  3.4 
X 3 X 1.  Inscr.  4 (O.)  + 1 (R.)  = 5 li. 
Not  ruled.  Covered  with  seal  impressions. 
II.  Statement  of  ku-mah  at  hand. 

11177  Baked.  Dark  brown.  Fairly  well  preserved. 

Only  U.  P.  of  O.  inscribed.  7.2  X 5.1  X 
2.1.  Inscr.  9 li.  Ruled.  1.  Shipload  (?) 
of  grain  received. 

11213  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Pieces  chipped  off. 

4.4  X 4 X 1.7.  Inscr.  S (0.)  + 6 (R.) 
= 14  li.  Ruled.  II.  Account  of  grain. 

11215  Baked.  Dark  gray.  Fairly  well  preserved. 

3.8  X 3.2  X 1.6.  Inscr.  6 (O.)  + 8 (R.) 
= 14  li.  Ruled.  II.  Account  of  beans,  etc. 
11235  Baked.  Brown.  Fragment.  2.1  X 3.1  X 

I. 6.  Inscr.  4 (O.)  + 4 (R.)  = 8 li. 

Ruled.  II.  Account. 

10757  Baked.  Dark  brown.  Only  Lo.  P.  of 

tablet  remaining.  4.7  X 5 X 1.9.  Tnscr. 
6 (O.)  + 6 (R.)  = 12  li.  Ruled.  III. 
Account  of  corn,  its  value  seeming  to  be 
expressed  in  silver  and  lead  (?). 

11247  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Two  large  pieces 
joined.  Broken,  cracked  and  crumbling. 
8 X 4.2  X 2.5.  Inscr.  16  (O.)  + 11  (R.) 
= 27  li.  Ruled.  II.  Account  of  bronze. 
11223  Baked.  Blackened  brown.  Fragment.  2.5 
X 4.5  X 1.2.  Inscr.  4 li  Ruled.  II. 
Account. 

11230  Baked.  Blackened  brown.  Fragment. 

Crumbling.  Varnished.  3.3  X 3.5  X 1.6. 
Inscr.  4 li.  Ruled.  II.  Account  of 
bronze  received. 

11206  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  R.  broken  off. 

5.5  X 4.3  X 1.1.  Inscr.  9 li.  Ruled. 

II.  Account  of  bronze  received. 


102 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


Text.  Pi, ate. 

King. 

Year. 

Month. 

Day 

75  27 

Gimil-Sin 

7 

4 

76  28 


29 


78  30 


79  31  Dungi  35  Se-kin-kud  8 


80  32  Dungi  35  Se-kin-kud 


81  32  Dungi  35  Se-kin-kud 


82  32  Ibi-Sin  1 


83  33  Dungi  37 


84  34  Dungi  37 


C.B.M.  Description. 

6064  Baked.  Reddish  brown,  blackened  in 
places.  Pieces  chipped  off  on  R.  11.2 
X 6.1  X 2.1.  Inscr.  11  (0.)  + 9 (R.) 
= 20  li.  Unusually  large  signs,  broad 
lines  and  heavy  rulings.  Nail  marks.  II. 
Account  of  fruit  harvest.  Phot.  PI.  IV. 
11571  Baked.  Dark  brown.  R.  blackened.  Lo.  E. 

broken  off.  10.3  X 6.3  X 2.7.  Inscr.  15 
(O.)  + 15  (R.)  + 2 (U.  E.)  + 2 (L.  E.) 
= 34  li.  Ruled.  II.  Inventory  list. 
11568  Baked.  Dark  brown.  T\vo  pieces  joined. 

Cracked.  7.9  X 5 X 2.1.  Inscr.  12  (O.) 
+ • 9 (R.)  = 21  li.  Ruled.  II.  Inven- 
tory of  the  belongings  of  Sarrum-ili  of  the 
city  of  Basime. 

11567  Baked.  Dark  brown.  8.5  X 5.8  X 2.4.  Inscr. 


12  (O.)  + l (Lo.  E.)  F 7 (R.)  = 20  li. 
Ruled.  3 lines  on  R.  erased.  Inventory. 


3419 

Baked . 

Light 

gray.  Twc 

i pieces  joined. 

12.4  X 4.8 

X 2.3.  Inscr.  18  (0.)  X 22 

(R.)  = 40 

cattle. 

li.  Ruled. 

IT.  Account  of 

/ 

11590 

Baked. 

Black 

. U.  Ri.  C. 

broken  off.  3.4 

X 3.1  X 1.4.  Inscr.  4 (0.)  + 4 (R.) 

= 8 li.  Not  ruled.  Covered  with 
traces  of  seal  impressions.  Nail  mark. 
II.  Account  of  cattle. 

5505  Case  tablet.  Baked.  Blackish  brown. 

Well  preserved.  3.8  X 3.4  X 1.5.  Inscr. 
7 (O.)  + S (R.)  = 15  li.  Ruled.  II. 

Account  of  cattle. 

3386  Baked.  Dull  brown.  L.  U.  C.  broken  off. 

Pieces  chipped  off.  4.7  X 4.3  X 1.8. 
Inscr.  6 (O.)  + 3 (R.)  = 9 li.  Ruled. 
IT.  Account  of  cattle. 

11181  Baked.  Light  brown,  blackened.  Cracked. 

Lo.  E.  of  0.  broken  off.  Pieces  of  O. 
chipped  off.  Surface  crumbling.  11X6 
X 2.7.  Inscr.  17  (col.  I)  + 18  (col.  TI) 
+ 7 (col.  Ill)  + 7 (col.  IV)  = 47  li. 
Ruled.  II.  Account  of  expenditures  of 
grain  for  the  sustenance  of  slaves,  engaged 
in  the  tillage  of  certain  fields. 

11172  Baked.  Blackish  gray.  Ri.  U.  C.  broken 
off.  Surface  of  O.  damaged.  18.8 
X 5.4  X 2.5.  Inscr.  24  (col.  T)  + 24 
(col.  II)  + 26  (col.  Ill)  + 19  (col.  IV) 


LATE, 

35 

35 

35 

36 

36 

37 

38 

39 

40 

40 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


103 


King. 

Year. 

Month. 

Day. 

C.B.M. 

'■imil-Sin 

7 

7 

1 

11578 

6 

12 

10760 

11 

? 

3409 

Hmil-Sin 

7 

3 

8 

11664 

11188 


Gimil-Sin  7 11570 


11148 


11189 


Gimil-Sin 

8 

Se-kin-[kud\ 

11210 

Ihi-Sin 

1 

6 

3395 

Description. 

= 93  li.  Ruled.  1.  Account  oj  grain 
for  the  sustenance  nj  workingmen. 

Baked.  Grayish  brown.  Ri.  U.  C.  of  R. 
chipped  off.  3.8  X 3.1  X 1.5.  Inscr.  6 
(O.)  + 1 G>o.  E.)  + 6 (R.)  = 13  li. 

Ruled.  II.  Account  oj  expenditures  of 
grain. 

Baked.  Blackish  gray.  L.  Lo.  C.  broken 
off.  5.1  X 4.3  X 1.4.  Tnscr.  8 (O.)  + 
8 (R.)  = 16  li.  Ruled.  III.  Accouyit  of 
field  expenditures. 

Baked.  Light  brown,  darkened  in  places. 
Two  pieces  joined.  Small  pieces  chipped 
off  on  R.  4.5  X 3.5  X 1.6.  Inscr.fi  (O.) 
+ 7 (R.)  = 13  li.  Ruled.  II.  Account. 
Baked.  Light  brown,  blackened  on  O. 
L.  C.  of  R.  broken  off.  5.1  X 3.9  X 1.7. 
Inscr.  S (O.)  +8  (R.)  + 2 (L.  E.)  = 
18  li.  Ruled.  IT.  Account  of  wages  paid 
to  workingmen. 

Baked.  Reddish  brown,  blackened  on 
surface.  Fragmentary.  R.  and  edges 
broken  off.  Crumbling.  Varnished. 
10.2  X 6.3  X 2.1.  Inscr.  17  (col.  I) 
+ 10  (col.  II)  = 27  li.  Ruled.  II. 
Account  of  expenditures  for  the  cultivation 
of  fields. 

Baked.  Dark  brown.  Ri  Lo.  C.  of  O.  and 
Lo.  P.  of  R.  broken  off.  10.5  X 4.7  X 
2.1.  Inscr.  16  (O.)  + 13  (R.)  + 2 (L.  E.) 
= 31  li.  Ruled.  II.  Account  estimating 
the  cost  of  cultivation  of  four  fields. 

Baked.  Reddish  brown,  blackened  in  places. 
Two  pieces  joined.  U.  P.  and  Lo.  L.  C. 
of  R.  broken  off.  11.3  X 5.2  X 2.3. 
Tnscr.  19  (O.)  + 10  (R.)  = 29  li. 

Ruled.  I.  Accounts  of  fields. 

Baked.  Dark  brown.  U.  P.  of  R.  surface 
broken  off.  R.  crumbling.  8.7  X 4.5 
X 2.  Inscr.  16  (O.)  + 14  (R.)  = 30 
li.  Ruled.  II.  Account  of  estimate  in 
regard  to  the  cultivation  of  fields. 

Baked.  Light  brown.  Small  pieces  broken 
off.  4.6  X 4.2  X 1.6.  Inscr.  6 (O.) 
+ 8 (R.)  + 3 (L.  E.)  = 17  li.  Ruled. 
II.  Account  of  expenditure  of  grain. 
Baked.  Light  brown.  Pretty  well  pre- 
served. 4.2  X 3.7  X 1.7.  Inscr.  6 (O.) 


104 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


Text.  Plate.  King.  Year.  Month.  Day 


95  41  Bur-Sin  5 


96  42 


97  4.4 


98  44 


99  44 


100  44,45  Dungi  41,44,45  Se-kin-kud 


101  46  Dungi  47 


102  46 


C.B.M.  Description. 

+ 7 (R.)  = 13  li.  Ruled.  II.  Account 
of  expenditures  of  grain. 

10430  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Lo.  Ri.  C.,  L.  E. 

and  Lo.  E.  broken  off.  Pieces  chipped 
off.  10.2  X 5.5  X 2.  Inscr.  14  (O.)  + 21 
(R.)  = 35  li.  Ruled.  III.  Account  of 
expenditures  of  corn. 

11660  Baked.  Light  brown.  Several  pieces 

joined.  U.  E.  broken  off.  Many  cracks. 
Small  pieces  chipped  off  from  surface. 

10.5  X 7.8  X 2.4.  Inscr.  22  (col.  I) 

+ 22  (col.  II)  + 22  (col.  Ill)  + 10 
(col.  IV)  = 76  li.  Ruled.  II.  List 

of  officials  and  employees. 

11569  Baked.  Brown,  darkened  in  places.  Two 
pieces  joined.  8.5  X 1.5  X 1.9.  Inscr. 
16  (O.)  + S (R.)  = 24  li.  Ruled.  II. 
Account  of  expenditures  of  corn. 

11250  Baked.  Reddish  brown,  blackened.  Frag- 
mentary. 7.8  X 4.8  X 2.5.  Inscr.  13 

(O.)  + 4 (II.)  = 16  li.  Ruled.  II. 

.Account. 

12631  Baked.  Dark  brown.  U.  P.  broken  off. 

Pieces  chipped  off.  5.7  X 4 X 2.4. 
Inscr.  9 (O.)  + 8 (R.)  = 17  li.  Ruled. 
II.  Account  of  silver. 

11240  Baked.  Grayish  brown.  L.  Lo.  C.  broken 
off.  11  X 6 X 2.2.  Inscr.  17  (col.  I) 
+ 20  (col.  II)  + 20  (col.  Ill)  + 31 

(col.  IV)  + 2 (L.  E.  col.  I)  + 3 (L.  E. 
col.  II)  = 94  li.  Ruled.  Writing  on  R. 
partly  obliterated.  II.  Account  of  corn 
and  wheat. 

11242  Baked.  Pale  brown,  blackened.  Ri.  U.  C. 

of  a large  tablet.  Three  pieces  joined. 
Originally  three  columns  on  each  side, 
two  remaining  on  O.,  of  R.  only  Ri.  E. 

9.5  X 7.4  X 1.5.  Inscr.  13  (col.  I) 
+ 22  (col.  IT)  + 24  (col.  Ill)  + 23 
(col.  IV)  = 74  li.  Ruled.  IT.  Account 
of  corn  and  wheat. 

11242  Baked.  Pale  brown,  blackened.  Fragment 
of  large  tablet  . Enclosed  in  the  same  box 
and  has  the  same  catalogue  number  as 
No.  101,  but  does  not  belong  to  same 
tablet.  2.4  X 7 X 1.8.  Inscr.  4 (col.  I) 
+ 6 (col.  II)  + 1 (col.  Ill)  + 3 (col.  IV) 
= 14  li.  Ruled.  II.  Account. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES 


OF  NIPPUR. 


105 


Text.  Plate.  King. 
103  47  Dungi 


104  48  Dungi 


105  48 


100  48 


107  49 


108  49 


109  49 


110  50 


111  51  Dungi 


112  51  Dungi 


113  51 

14 


Year.  Month. 
39 


39  7,  10 


35(?  11 


37 


Day.  C.B.M. 

11241 


11243 


11207 


11222 


11244 


11192 


1 1245 


11239 


10+  (?)  3414 


11249 


3379 


Descbiption. 

Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Cracked  and 
pieces  broken  away.  11.7  X 7.2  X 3.2. 
Inscr,  18  (col.  I)  + 18  (col.  II)  + 2 
(col.  Ill ) = 38  li.  Ruled.  II.  Account 
of  grain. 

Baked.  Grayish  brown.  Three  pieces 
joined.  U.  and  L.  E.  broken  off.  11 
X 7.5  X 2.2.  Inscr.  19  (col.  I)  + 19 
(col.  II)  = 38  li.  Rilled.  II.  Account 
of  grain. 

Baked.  Dark  brown,  blackened  on  R. 
Small  pieces  of  surface  chipped  off.  4.3 
X 3.3  X 1.9.  Inscr.  G (O.)  + 2 (R.)  = 8 li. 
Ruled.  IT.  Account  of  figs,  dates,  etc. 
Baked.  Light  brown.  Well  preserved.  3.2  X 

3.1  X 1.5.  Inscr.  4 (O.)  + 1 (R.)  = 5 li. 
Ruled.  II.  Account  of  fish  oil. 

Baked.  Reddish  brown,  blackened.  Frag- 
ment of  large  tablet.  Two  pieces  joined. 

7.2  X 8.8  X 2.5.  Inscr.  9 li.  Writing 
small,  but  sharp  and  distinct.  Ruled. 
II.  Account  of  payments  made  to  slaves. 

Baked.  Reddish  brown,  darkened.  Frag- 

ment of  larger  tablet.  5 X 7.3  X 2.2. 
Inscr.  8 (col.  I)  + 5 (col.  II)  = 13  li. 
Ruled.  II.  Pay-list. 

Baked.  Reddish  brown,  blackened.  Frag- 

ment of  large  tablet.  6.2  X 9.4  X 3.1. 
Inscr.  6 (col.  I)  + 14  (col.  II)  + 7 
(col.  Ill)  = 27  li.  Ruled.  II.  Pay-list. 
Baked.  Reddish  brown,  blackened.  Frag- 
ment of  large  tablet.  Two  pieces  joined. 

Originally  the  tablet  had  12  columns  of 
writing.  Only  U.  P.  of  R.  remaining. 

8.2  X 17.6  X 3.4.  Inscr.  8 (col.  VII. 
+ 8 (col.  VIII)  + 9 (col.  IX)  + 1U 
(col.  X)  = 35  li.  Ruled.  II.  Pay-list. 

Baked.  Blackish  yellow.  U.  L.  C.  and 
L.  Lo.  P.  of  R.  broken  off.  4.8  X 4 X 

I. 8.  Inscr.  9 (O.)  + 1 (Lo.  E.)  + 3 

(R.)  = 13  li.  Ruled.  II.  Distributions 
to  8 men. 

Baked.  Dark  gray.  Ri.  side  broken  off. 
Pieces  chipped  off.  Crumbling.  7 X 3.5 
X 2.  Inscr.  13  (O.)  + 8 (R.)  = 21  li. 
Writing  on  R.  partly  obliterated.  Ruled, 

II.  Account  of  grain  oil. 

Baked.  Dark  gray,  blackened  in  places. 


106 


SUMEIUAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OI'  U1I 


Text. 


lit 


115 


I Hi 


1 17 


1 IS 


1 19 


120 


121 


122 


123 


Plate.  King  Yeah.  Month.  Day. 


52  Dungi  49 


52  Dungi.  41  3 


52  Gimil-Sin  4 7 


53,  54  Gimil-Sin  7 1 


54 


55 


55 


56 


50 


C.B.M.  Descbiption. 

Cracked.  Pieces  chipped  off.  4.6  X 3.S 
X 1.6.  Inscr.  S (O.)  + 2 (R.)  = 10  li. 
Ruled.  II.  Account  of  corn. 

11205  Baked.  Pale  brown,  darkened.  Cracked. 

Pieces  chipped  off.  Crumbling.  Var- 
nished. 6.8  X 4 X 2.2.  Inscr.  13  (0.)  X 

6 (R.)  = 19  li.  Ruled.  11.  Account. 
11205  Raked.  Reddish  brown.  Ri.  Lo.  C.  and  E. 

broken  off.  4.4  X 4 X 2.1.  Inscr.  8 
(O.)  + 5 (R.)  = 13  li.  Ruled.  II. 

Account  of  expenditures  of  corn. 

12592  Baked.  Light  brown.  Well  preserved. 

5.5  X 4.4  X 1.8.  Inscr.  10  (O.)  X 12 

(R.)  = 22  li.  Ruled.  III.  Account  of 
expenditures  of  grain. 

11659  Baked.  Dark  brown.  U.  and  L.  E.  broken 

off.  12.5  > 7.5  X 2.4.  Inscr.  11  (col.  1) 
+ 21  (col.  II)  + 24  (col.  Ill)  + 12 
(col.  IV)  = 59  li.  Ruled.  Writing 

partly  effaced  or  broken  off.  II. 

Account  of  expenditures  of  corn  and  wheat. 
{One  gur  of  wheat  for  porphyry  stone  for  a 
couch  for  Nusku. 

11217  Baked.  Dark  reddish  brown.  Well  pre- 

served, only  a small  piece  of  surface 
chipped  off.  3.5  X 3.3  X 2.8.  Inscr. 

7 (O.)  + 3 (R.)  = 10  li.  Ruled.  II. 
Account  of  expenditure  of  corn. 

3401  Baked.  Light  brown,  darkened  in  places. 

U.  Ri.  C.  broken  off.  4.5  X 3.8  X 1.6. 
Inscr.  5 (O.)  -I-  6 (R.)  =11  li.  Ruled. 
II.  Account  of  corn. 

11895  Baked.  Brown,  darkened  in  places.  Small 
pieces  of  surface  chipped  off.  4.7  X 3.8 
X L7.  Inscr.  8 (O.)  + 6 (R.)  = 14  li. 
Ruled.  II.  Account  of  expenditure  of 
drink. 

11246  Baked.  Dark  brown.  Fragmentary.  Three 
pieces  joined.  8.4  X 5.3  X 2.5.  Inscr. 
15  (O.)  + 6 (R.)  = 21  li.  Ruled.  II. 
Account  of  expenditure  of  corn. 

11208  Baked.  Brown,  blackened.  Fragment.  5.3 
X 5.2.  Inscr.  8 li.  Ruled.  II.  Account 
of  expenditures  of  corn. 

11195  Baked.  Light  brown,  blackened.  Frag- 
mentary. 5.5  X 3.7  X 1.9.  Inscr.  9 (O.) 
+ 7 (R.)  = 16  li.  Nail  marks,  Ruled, 
II.  Pay-list. 


Text. 

124 

125 

126 

127 

128 

129 

130 

131 

132 

133 

134 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


107 


Plate. 

56 


56 


57 


58 


58 


59 


59 


59 


60 


60,  61 


61 


King.  Year.  Month. 

Bur- Sin  3 ? 


Gimil-Sin  7 5 


Gimil-Sin  7 3 


Gimil-Sin  7 7 


Gimil-Sin  7 9 


Gimil-Sin  8 


Gimil-Sin  8 11 


(New  dates.) 


Bur-Sin  9 3 


Day. 


C.B  M.  Description. 

11580  Baked.  Light  brown.  Ri.  U.  C.  broken 
off.  3.5  X 3.5  X 1.5.  Inscr.  5 (O.)  + 
5 (R.)  = 10  li.  Ruled.  II.  Account  of 
expenditures. 

12593  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  3.1  X 3.5  X 1.2. 

Inscr.  4 (O.)  + 5 (R.)  = 9 li.  Ruled. 
III.  Account  of  expenditure  of  sesam. 
11577  Baked.  Brown,  blackened  on  R.  U.  and 

Lo.  P.  of  O.  chipped  off.  7.8  X 3.8  X 

I. 8.  Inscr.  13  (O.)  + 16  (R.)  + 1 (U.  E.) 
+ 1 (L.  E)  = 31  li.  Ruled.  II.  Account 
of  expenditures  of  A. TER  and  KU.KAL. 

3387  Baked.  Light  brown,  darkened.  U.  and 

Lo.  P.  broken  off.  4.3  X 4.2  X 1.7 
Inscr.  8 (0.)  + 5 (R.)  = 13  li.  Ruled. 

II.  Account  of  expenditures  of  grain. 

3392  Baked.  Black.  5.1  X 3.9  X 1.8.  Inscr.  7 

(O.)  + 8 (R.)  = 15  li.  Ruled.  Writing 

on  R.  partly  illegible.  II.  Account  of 
expenditure  of  grain. 

3432  Baked.  Light  brown  with  black  spots. 

Well  preserved.  7.8  X 4.7  X 1.8.  Inscr. 
11  (O.)  + 7 (R.)  = 18  li.  Ruled.  II. 
Account  of  expenditures  of  grain. 

3376  Baked.  Reddish  brown,  darkened  in  places. 

3.7  X 3.2  X 1.8.  Inscr.  6 (O.)  + 9 (R.) 
= 15  li.  Ruled.  II.  Account  of  expend- 
itures of  grain. 

3410  Baked.  Pale  brown,  blackened.  Fragmentary, 
R.  only  remaining.  3.8  X 3.3  X 1.9.  Inscr. 
7 li.  Ruled.  II.  Account  of  grain.  Pay- 
ment of  corn  to  Temple  of  Enlil. 

11133  Baked.  Brown.  Fragmentary,  only  U.  P. 

of  O.  remaining.  6.3  X 5.8  X 1.6.  Inscr. 
9 (O.)  + 1 (R.)  + 2 (L.  E.)  = 12  li, 

III.  (Purchased  by  Dr.  Haynes  and  said 
to  come  from  Yoklia  or  Telloh.)  Expen- 
ditures of  flour , A. TER,  etc.,  for  temple 
offerings. 

10160  Baked.  Light  brown.  U.  L.  C.  broken  off. 

Small  pieces  chipped  off.  7.2  X 4.9 
X 1.8.  Inscr.  12  (O.)  + 10  (R.)  = 22  li. 
Ruled.  III.  Account  of  expenditures  of  corn 
for  temple  offerings  and  stone  for  couches. 
11204  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Well  preserved. 

4.4  X 3.8  X 1.7.  Inscr.  8 (O.)  + 7 
(R.)  = 15  li.  Ruled.  II.  Account  of 
expenditures  of  wool. 


108 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  II.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


Text. 

135 

Plate. 

62 

King. 

(Uncertain 

date.) 

Yea  r. 

Month.  Day 

9 

136 

63 

Dungi 

40 

7 

137 

63 

? 

? 

? ? 

138  63 


139  63 


140  64  Dungi  40 


141  64  Dungi  40 


142  64  Dungi  40 


143  64  ? ? 


144  65 


C.B.M.  Description. 

10161  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Two  pieces  joined. 

Lo.  P.  broken  and  crumbling.  11.3  X 5.8 
< 2.1.  Inscr.  20  (O.)  + 20  (R.)  + 2 
(Lo.  E.)  + 1 (L.E.)  = 43  li.  Ruled.  III. 
Account  of  expenditures  of  corn. 

11183  Baked.  Pale  brown,  blackened.  Crumbling. 

Varnished.  6.3  X 4.2  X 2.2.  Inscr.  13 
(O.)  + 9 (R.)  = 22  li.  Ruled.  II.  Ac- 
count of  expenditure  of  wool. 

11182  Baked.  Dark  brown.  Ri.  E.  and  surface 
of  R.  broken  off.  6.8  X 4.1  X 2.  Inscr. 
12  (O.)  + 3 (R.)  = 15  li.  Ruled.  Traces 
of  date.  II.  Account  of  assignment  of 
garments. 

11232  Baked.  Brown,  blackened.  Fragment. 

Crumbling.  Varnished.  3.2  X 5 X 2.4. 
Inscr.  5 li.  Ruled.  II.  Probably  upper 
part  of  No.  139.  Account  of  assignment 
of  garments. 

11194  Baked.  Brown,  blackened.  Fragment. 

Crumbling.  Varnished.  4.3  X 4.9  X 2.3. 
Inscr.  7 li.  Ruled.  II.  Probably  lower 
part  of  No.  138.  Account  of  assignment 
of  garments. 

11199  Baked.  Reddish  brown,  blackened.  Broken 
and  crumbling.  Varnished.  4.4  X 3.8 
X 1.7.  Inscr.  9 (O.)  + 3 (R.)  = 12  li. 
Ruled.  II.  Account  of  assignment  of 

garments. 

11221  Baked.  Brown,  blackened.  Ri.  E.  broken 
off.  Crumbling.  Varnished.  3.6  X 3.9 
X 1.6.  Inscr.  6 (O.)  + 6 (R.)  = 12  li. 
Ruled.  II.  Account  of  assignment  of 

garments. 

11201  Baked.  Brown,  blackened.  Fragmentary. 

Crumbling.  Varnished.  5.5  X 4.4  X 2.4. 
Inscr.  7 (O.)  + 9 (R.)  = 16  li.  Ruled. 
II.  Account  of  assignment  of  garments. 
11225  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Ri.  E.  and  most 
of  R.  broken  off.  3.8  X 3.5  X 1.5. 
Inscr.  6 (O.)  + 3 (R.)  = 9 li.  Ruled. 
Traces  of  date.  II.  Acknowledgment  of 
garments  received. 

11186  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Fragmentary. 

Two  pieces  joined.  U.  P.  wanting.  5.5 
X 5.7  X 2.9.  Inscr.  9 (O.l  + 8 (R.)  = 
17  li.  Ruled.  II.  Account  of  assignment 
of  fields  to  a number  of  persons. 


PROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OP  NTPPIJR. 


109 


Text.  Plate.  King.  Yeah.  Month.  Day. 

145  65  Gimil-Sin  7 


146  65 


147  65 


14S  66 


149  66 


150  66 


151  67 


152  67  Gimil-Sin  7 


153  67  Gimil-Sin  7 Se-kin-kud 


154  67 


155  67 


C.B.M.  Description. 

11668  Baked.  Dark  gray.  U.  L.  C.  broken  off. 

Surface  crumbling.  3.7  X 3.9  X 1.2. 
Inscr.  5 (O.)  4-  3 (R.)  = 8 li.  Not 
ruled.  Traces  of  seal  impressions.  II. 
Field,  account. 

3377  Baked.  Yellowish  brown  with  black  spots. 

U.  P.  broken  off . 4.7  X 3.7  X 1.8.  Inscr. 
7 (O.)  + 8 (R.)  = 15  li.  Ruled.  II. 
Account  of  assignment  of  vegetables. 

3408  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Fragment.  4.3 
X 4.2  X 1.8.  Inscr.  7 (O.)  + 1 (R.) 

= 8 li.  Ruled.  II.  Account  of  assign- 
ment of  corn  to  a.  member  of  persons? 

11187  Baked.  Brown,  blackened.  IT.  P.  broken 
off.  Cracked.  Crumbling.  9.2  X 4.6 
X 2.6.  Inscr.  16  (O.)  + 16  (R.)  = 

32  li.  Ruled.  II.  Account  of  assign- 
ment. of  grain , vegetables,  etc.,  to  a number 
of  persons. 

3405  Baked.  Grayish  brown.  Fragmentary. 

L.  E.  broken  away.  4.5  X 3.3  X 1.5. 
Inscr.  7 (O.)  + 5 (R.)  = 12  li.  Ruled. 
II.  Account  of  grain  expended. 

1 1 IDS  Baked.  Brown,  blackened.  Fragmentary. 

Crumbling.  6.2  X 3.9  X 1.8.  Inscr. 
7 li.  Ruled.  II.  Account  of  cream. 
11174  Baked.  Dark  brown,  blackened.  Frag- 

mentary. Middle  P.  of  large  tablet. 
10  X 6.5  X 2.  Inscr.  20  (col.  I)  + 20 
(col.  II)  = 40  li.  Ruled.  Writing 
injured  by  small  pieces  chipped  off.  I. 
Account  of  silver,  corn,  etc.,  received  and 
at  hand. 

3393  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Ri.  E.  broken 

off.  3.9  X 3.8  X 1.  Inscr.  5 (O.) 

4-  3 (R.)  = 8 li.  Not  ruled.  Covered 
with  seal  impressions.  II.  Account. 

3380  Baked.  Light  brown,  blackened  in  places. 

Pieces  chipped  off.  4.1  X 3.6  X 1.7. 
Inscr.  3 (O.)  + 3 (R.)  = 6 li.  Ruled. 
II.  Account  of  expenditures  of  grain. 
11252  Baked.  Reddish  brown,  blackened.  Frag- 
ment. of  larger  tablet.  Crumbling.  6.8 
X 5.1  X 2.8.  Inscr.  10  li.  Ruled. 
II.  Fragment  of  a literary  document, 
written  in  the  Ur  period. 

11136  Baked  Reddish  brown,  darkened  in  places. 


110 


SUMERIAN  DOCUMENTS,  IT.  DYNASTY  OF  UR 


Text. 


156 


157 


1 58 


159 


160 


161 


162 


163 


164 


165 


166 


167 


16S 


Plate.  King.  Year.  Month.  Day. 


68  Dungi  37 


68  Dungi  39 


68  Oi  mil-Sin  2 Se-kin-kud 


68  Se-kin-kud  25 


69 


69 


69 


69  5 16 


69 


70 


70 


70 


70  Dungi  37 


C.B.M.  Description. 

R.  broken  off.  3 X 3.1  X 0.9.  Inscr. 
4 li.  Ruled.  II.  Memorandum  (?). 
11258  Baked.  Dark  gray.  Crumbling.  4.3  X 

3.9  X 1 .6.  Inscr.  5 (O.)  + 6 (R.)  = 
11  li.  Ruled.  II.  Receipt  of  corn. 

11218  Baked.  Blackish  gray.  Fragmentary.  O., 

except  E.,  broken  off.  4 X 3.8  X 0.8. 
Inscr.  7 (O.)  + 3 (R.)  = 10  li.  Ruled. 
II.  Cannot  be  determined. 

11584  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Fragmentary. 

Crumbling.  Varnished.  3.8  X 3.5  X 1. 
Inscr.  4 (O.)  + 3 (R.)  = 7 li.  Not 

ruled..  II.  Can  hardly  be  determined. 
11669  Baked.  Reddish  brown.  Fragmentary. 

U.  L.  C.  broken  off.  3.9  X 3.4  X 1.7. 
Inscr.  3 (O.)  + 1 (R.)  = 4 li.  Ruled. 
II.  Not  to  be  determined. 

11861  Baked.  Yellowish  brown,  blackened  in 
places.  Small  pieces  chipped  off.  7.5  X 

I. 8.  Inscr.  10  (O.)  + 2 (R.)  = 12 li.  Ruled. 

II.  Account  of  copper. 

11589  Baked.  Brown,  blackened.  U.  L.  C. 

broken  off.  1 X 3.6  X 1.5.  Inscr.  6 
(O.)  + 3 (R.)  = 9 li.  Ruled.  II. 
Account  of  distribution  of  straw  to  different 
persons  during  the  same  month. 

3372  Baked.  Brown.  R.  broken  off.  3.9  X 3.6 
1.1.  Inscr.  3 li.  Ruled.  II.  State- 
ment of  the  amount  of  wheat  and  corn  at 
hand. 

3390  Baked.  Brown, darkened.  Fragment.  4.7  X 
3.6  X 1.9.  Inscr.  6 li . Ruled.  II.  Account 
of  corn. 

11993  Baked.  Brown,  blackened.  Fragment.  5 X 
4.1  X 1.6.  Inscr.  5 li.  Ruled.  II.  Same 
account. 

11190  Baked.  Brown,  blackened.  Fragment  of 
large  tablet.  5 X 6 X 0.8.  Inscr.  14 
(col.  I)  + 11  (col.  II)  = 25  li.  Ruled. 
II.  Account  of  expenditure  of  grain,  etc. 
11209  Baked.  Grayish  brown.  Fragment  of  larger 
tablet.  3.5  X 5 X 1.4.  Inscr.  7 (col.  I) 
+ 7 (col.  II)  = 14  li.  Ruled.  II.  Account 
of  expenditure  of  grain , etc. 

11231  Baked.  Reddish  brown,  darkened  in  places. 

Fragmentary.  2.9  X 3 X 0.9.  Inscr.  4(0.) 
+ 1 (It.)  = 5 li.  Ruled.  II-  Account. 

11219  Baked.  Blackish  gray.  0.  broken  off. 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR. 


Ill 


Text.  Plate. 


1G9  70 


170  70 


171  70 


Illustr.  Plate. 

1,  2 I 

3,  4 I 

5,  6 II 

7.  8 II 

9-12  III 

15, 10  IV 


17,  18  V 

19,  20  V 

21,  22  V 

23,  24  VI 

25,  26  VII 

27,  28  VIII 

29,  30  IX 

31,32  IX 

33,  34  X 

35,  36  XI 

37  XI 

38  XII 

39,  40  XII 

41  XII 


King. 


Year. 


Month. 


Day. 


O.B.M.  Description. 

4 X 3.8  X LI.  Inscr.  4 li.  Ruled.  II. 
Cannot  be  determined . 

11236  Baked.  Reddish  brown,  darkened.  Frag- 
ment. Only  Lo.  E.  remaining.  1.5  X 
3.7  X 1.8.  Inscr.  1 (O.)  + 1 (R.)  = 2 li. 
Ruled.  II.  Account  of  vegetables. 

11418a  Baked.  Reddish  brown,  darkened.  Frag- 
ment of  larger  tablet.  2.4  X 3.3  X 1.7. 
Inscr.  4 li.  Ruled.  I.  Pay-list. 

114181)  Baked.  Reddish  brown,  darkened.  Frag- 
ment of  a larger  tablet.  2.3  X 2.3  X 
0.9.  Inscr.  4 li.  Ruled.  1.  Account. 


2.  Halftone  Reproductions. 

Content.  C.B.M.  Description. 


O.  and  R.  of  a document  of  court  proceedings 
in  regard  to  a slave.  See  translation  No.  I. 

O.  and  II.  of  a document  of  court  proceedings. 
See  translation  No.  II. 

O.  and  R.  of  a bond  in  regard  to  corn.  See 
translation  IV. 

O.  and  R.  of  a promissory  note  in  regard  to 
silver.  See  translation  No.  VI. 

Case  of  above. 

O.  and  R.  of  a document  in  regard  to  the  pur- 
chase of  a palm  grove.  See  translation  No. 
VII. 

O.  and  R.  of  a document  in  regard  to  a loan  of 
grain.  See  translation  No.  XIII. 

O.  and  R.  of  a receipt  of  silver. 

O.  and  R.  of  a case  or  envelope  in  which  origin- 
ally was  enclosed  a receipt  of  grain. 

O.  and  R.  of  an  account  of  a fruit  harvest.  See 
translation  No.  XV. 

O.  and  R.  of  an  inventory  list. 

O.  and  R.  of  an  account  of  cattle.  See  trans- 
lation No.  XVII. 

0.  and  R.  of  an  account  of  the  cost  for  the  til- 
lage of  some  fields.  See  translation  No.  XIX. 

O.  and  R.  of  an  account. 

0.  and  R.  of  a list  of  officials  and  employes. 

O.  and  R.  of  an  account  of  com  and  wheat. 

Fragment  of  an  account  of  payments  made  to 
a large  number  of  slaves. 

It.  of  a pay-list. 

O.  and  R.  of  an  account  of  the  expenditure  of 
drink.  See  translation  No.  XX. 

Fragment  of  an  account  of  temple  offerings. 
See  translation  No.  XXII. 


11176  See  description  of  tablet  No.  1. 

11574  See  description  of  tablet  No.  2. 

11572  See  description  of  tablet  No.  7. 

3593  See  description  of  tablet  No.  13. 

3593  See  description  of  tablet  No.  13. 

5136  See  description  of  tablet  No.  14. 

3378  See  description  of  tablet  No.  23. 

10240  See  description  of  tablet  No.  29. 

11248  See  description  of  tablet  No.  32. 

6064  See  description  of  tablet  No.  75. 

11571  See  description  of  tablet  No.  76. 

3419  See  description  of  tablet  No.  79. 

11189  See  description  of  tablet  No.  92. 

10757  See  description  of  tablet  No.  70. 

11660  See  description  of  tablet  No.  96. 

11240  See  description  of  tablet  No.  100. 

11244  See  description  of  tablet  No.  107. 

11239  See  description  of  tablet  No.  110. 

11895  See  description  of  tablet  No.  120. 

11133  See  description  of  tablet  No.  132. 


XII 


NUMBERS  OF  THE  CATALOGUE  OF  THE  BABYLONIAN 

MUSEUM. 


C.B.M. 

Text. 

Plate. 

C.B.M. 

Text. 

Plate. 

C.B.M. 

Text. 

Plate 

3372 

162 

69 

3432 

129 

59 

1 1 184 

114 

52 

3373 

48 

18 

3593 

13 

6,  7 

11185 

57 

22 

3374 

47 

18 

5136 

14 

8 

1 1 186 

144 

65 

3376 

130 

59 

551 15 

81 

32 

11187 

148 

66 

3377 

146 

65 

6064 

75 

27 

11188 

89 

36 

3378 

23 

12 

10156 

11 

5 

11189 

92 

39 

3379 

113 

51 

10160 

133 

60 

11190 

165 

70 

3380 

153 

67 

10161 

135 

62 

11192 

108 

49 

3383 

51 

19 

10230 

46 

18 

11193 

45 

17 

3386 

82 

32 

10240 

29 

13 

11194 

139 

63 

3387 

127 

58 

10242 

42 

17 

11195 

123 

56 

3388 

49 

19 

10253 

36 

15 

11197 

20 

10 

3389 

35 

15 

10256 

40 

16 

11198 

150 

66 

3390 

163 

69 

10424 

41 

16 

11199 

140 

64 

3391 

52 

20 

10430 

95 

41 

11201 

142 

64 

3392 

128 

58 

10439 

30 

13 

1 1203 

59 

20 

3393 

152 

67 

10480 

4 

3 

11204 

134 

61 

3394 

27 

13 

10492 

12 

5 

1 1205 

115 

52 

3395 

94 

40 

10757 

70 

25 

11206 

74 

26 

3397 

60 

23 

10760 

86 

35 

1 1207 

105 

48 

3398 

26 

12 

10765 

55 

20 

11208 

122 

56 

3399 

39 

16 

10776 

15 

9 

1 1209 

166 

70 

3400 

28 

13 

10932 

19 

10 

11210 

93 

40 

3401 

119 

55 

11110 

62 

23 

11212 

31 

14 

3403 

10 

4 

11133 

132 

60 

11213 

67 

25 

3405 

149 

66 

11136 

155 

67 

11214 

43 

17 

3408 

147 

65 

11148 

91 

38 

11215 

68 

25 

3409 

87 

35 

11172 

84 

34 

1 1216 

54 

20 

3410 

131 

59 

11174 

151 

67 

11217 

118 

54 

3411 

18 

10 

11176 

1 

1 

1 1218 

157 

08 

3412 

9 

4 

11177 

66 

24 

11219 

168 

70 

3414 

111 

51 

11181 

83 

33 

1 1220 

64 

24 

3419 

79 

31 

11182 

137 

63 

11221 

141  . 

64 

3422 

22 

11 

11183 

136 

63 

11222 

106 

48 

[ M2] 


FROM  THE  TEMPLE  ARCHIVES  OF  NIPPUR.  113 


C.B.M. 

Text. 

Plate. 

C.B.M. 

Text 

Plate. 

C.B.M. 

Text. 

Plate. 

11223 

72 

26 

11256 

33 

14 

11585 

50 

19 

11224 

0 

3 

11258 

156 

68 

11586 

44 

17 

11225 

143 

64 

11259 

34 

14 

1 1587 

25 

12 

11230 

73 

26 

11407 

5 

3 

11589 

161 

69 

11231 

167 

70 

11418 

170 

70 

11590 

80 

32 

11232 

138 

63 

11566 

58 

22 

11591 

65 

24 

11235 

69 

25 

11567 

78 

30 

11659 

117 

53,  54 

11236 

169 

70 

1 1568 

77 

29 

11660 

96 

42 

11239 

110 

50 

11569 

97 

43 

11661 

56 

21 

11240 

100 

45 

1 1570 

90 

37 

11664 

88 

36 

11241 

103 

47 

11571 

76  ' 

82 

11665 

17 

9 

11242 

101,  102 

16 

1 1572 

7 

4 

11667 

37 

15 

11243 

104 

48 

1 1574 

2 

2 

11668 

145 

65 

11244 

107 

49 

11575 

21 

11 

11861 

160 

69 

11245 

109 

49 

11577 

126 

57 

11895 

120 

55 

11246 

121 

55 

11578 

85 

35 

11993 

164 

69 

11247 

71 

26 

1 1579 

24 

12 

12575 

16 

9 

11248 

32 

14 

11580 

124 

56 

12576 

3 

3 

11249 

112 

51 

11581 

53 

20 

12577 

8 

4 

11250 

98 

43 

11582 

63 

24 

12592 

116 

52 

11252 

154 

67 

11583 

38 

16 

12593 

125 

56 

11255 

61 

23 

11584 

158 

68 

12631 

99 

44 

Tablets  Arranged  According  to  Kings.1 

Dungi:  Nos.  7,  14,  17,  22,  23,  24,  30,  34,  44,  46,  56,  57,  64,  79,  80,  81, 83,  84,  100,  101,  103,  104,  111,  112,  114,  115,  136, 
140,  141,  142,  156,  157,  168. 

Bur-Sin:  Nos.  3,  4,  8,  11,  15,  18,  29,  32,  33,  35,  36,  40,  41,  42,  45-,  47,  54,  55,  58,  59,  60,  95,  124,  134. 

Gimil-Sin:  Nos.  1,  2,  9,  13,  21,  25,  37,  38,  48,  49,  61,  62,  63,  65,  75,  85,  88,  90,  93,  116,  117,  126,  127,  128,  129,  130,  131, 
145,  152,  153,  158. 

Ibi-Sin:  Nos.  16,  39,  51,  82,  94. 

1 Cf.  Dutes,  Chapter  V,  and  Description  of  Tablets,  Chapter  XI. 


15 


LIST  OF  CUNEIFORM  SIGNS. 


II.  Dyn.  of  Ur  Assyrian  Phonetic  Values 


V- 

)> — 

CLA-  ^ (VYUyWu.  ^ (oMAj 

y 4^  173:9,$. 

— 

AvcJL 

^tr 

CjUu 

o^uy uu 

r- 

pc 

Hf 

CWu  ( cliyvu|I/u- 

>^4 

4L 

Mt; 

>■# 

Ovuu_ 

Fm>a-=^ 

B^FFK 

r ^ 

cJVci/n/vL(x_ 

m 


r- 

lYvxAxrv^. 

AYUX/VU- 

OW^CU,  UA.  AM. 

/ | 

UA- 

w 

CUM 

if- 

ylrCUU-  ^ fKYVCuf 

% 

m'-'Ou 

cf/£UL 

Ua-^um- 

Sm,  Ao.  ^1. 

m 

AOyvu- 

J2/VU 

^v'-<ua,  5/v^l  ^ 

(>V(XavUa- 

116 


37 

R4 

/ 1/ 

(Yvux/x. 

3s.  ^ 

ppr 

Mjuu 

C|aXu_ 

Mo. 

ppT 

^/Vvvuvvvyi.ou, 

^1.  )>^p^— 

pflv- 

Should 

n >L 

43. 

Kfe 

r- 

to.  HT^ 

3i-(  S^J 

4J. 

w 

rvuxAw™ 

^ ?x 

^TT 

/ 

rwux^. 

47.  ^ 

PV= 

\ 

&MA- 

48.  ^fff— f 

t 

m- 

rruvA\_^ 

41.  fc= 

t 

4"0lJr 

Jo.  tt=  + 

Oon/vw.  i- 

o 

/VUA/WU , Tj- 

^IL-  ( 

/>muL--- 

avdr 

(h(xXy 

/^CL^Vvu-) 

Inx,  , Aju.  JVo.  Hi, 

3*^,  Alw-  JV3.  115. 

vttu(  Aju  JVo  US'. 

(ju{i cL) 

Mi 

CX/Wi— 

cyaju 

* 

/ylXX 

$ 

/juL  + oJL 

AjJr 

4sr 

dvwv- 

>tfr 

OUA_ 

PF 

^Vvu(x/u — 

lAmu 

/ 

( Yvux - 

*airv 

U/VVL  + fl'YUL. 

JUaL  ^J/o. 

3i  + 3L 

fYm_ 

A- 

Ij'cu-  h-tt-J/5 

1 

/ \S 

&A  ( vuvwl 

8'3. 


M 


W\ 

\ 

cu 

trm 

C|/(U 

/ 

(you- 

dx_ 

>W 

K . / 

AiU’/imuv  ( 

MioI)U(y 

W\ 

v^ 

A/cl- 

,H-^U 

PRR 

lr(Vu 

no 


% 


loo. 


101. 


f 

Y'  / 

Au.  + (u~ 

JL- 

m 

Wu 

mm 

(L 

qr? 

/ 

U_ 

AX<j/ 

. 

/tA.  ; itt  A'o  lo^ 

^ £j/ilr  luiir 

+ (j/tt  (^J 

1o£. 


1A; 


Aj uu  ffo.  ]00 . 


h/o,  Si)1?. 


/Tul-  d. 


JL 


I I 


t 


/fCvvu- 


m 


-12,3 


154 


m X 

lit. 

127. 

in 

no.  ^ 


13l  ^ 

152. 

133. 

137. 


AvJ\Arwv\ 

T 

(AiX  (<^f£ 

* 

(M/vn^- 

A^''f"wu 

/VUa/vvl.  . 

yictL/i_ 

•<^C 

£A_ 

If=t==- 

jlu/WO 

]£*=& 

AjUj^ 

\/~  /0\vv^ 

Ax.  Aail,  /Vo.  2.icj 

AaJL-(  Ajul.  Jta.  %$0. 

tfe- 

/|yCL/Vvv~ 

$ 

2A4/Wl_ 

no.  4|n&— 

#3TT 

fVO^o^v^— 

ot  ,UM-  AxlX- 
1 

-4pE3T 

« 2® 

4ffl 

AcuL-  (~^ftJ< 

yX 

MS.  £>< 

^c- 

/|v<X^v^  4cu/u 

Ml 

K-tft 

+ JL — 

IK  $?£ 

(A£/v>a_ 

i ^ 

1%. 

aaAt 

M7.  ^ 

\c  OU  (C^CUJ 

M». 

cfxc-  ^ Jwk^~ 

^ Vp 

^F 

miy  t 30X- 

'*•  fe>- 

AA_ 

9 cK 


sriEji' ' 
^>n,  i ■ ^ 

^ yE=[  8o:6- 


: i%  . 


ISi.  ^ 

l4 

Y~ 

m.  — < 

£< 

(Wf*  0|A-A_ 

❖ 

4 

(JLtuoj/' 1 \}V 

& 

m. 

dxCo^ 

w.  ^ 

i.Tf 

XyC' 

wt-  ^ 

( \\ L. 

,n  4l 

±L- 

K*  ^ 

VC  \ 

4^ 

/icaywu— 

xCCC^ 

44 

• / 

I/wl-  ( /Vu_ 

%0.  XfjH 

>~^=f 

H} 

/lco4_ 

1 a. 

#= 

JUL 

$$>* 
s $kx- 

>A4/Wv, 


■m 


m 


m. 


Hi.  <^> 

HV 


115,  4( 

115.  x< 


m 

f\M — 

y^V  (X/ 

< 

AX-  ( Xu(c|/)(Ai(9 
(^ 

air  ^ 

M 

(YXA/YY^--  i AXUayw • 

-4X 

OwX-  f <jx— 

CVj.  R.  E.C-.  M>.  i£>3: 

fr 

C|XAmxL~ 

fr 

4^ 

juX  ( dxL 

v" 

Ajx^ya/n — 

-4 

frw  oav- 

OC 

w. 

-<^T 

iuyjiA-. 

itlr 

in. 

m 

*gr 

cmb  ) A Mau- 

4- 

111 

— 

• . v< 

bo^‘  1 Ax- 

2,oo. 

a/u_ 

2,oj.  <5p^ 

v''” 

A/Cucj/ 

3,0%.  4-^1 

4|ff 

/|^a(cL) 

4^1 

502, 

iUj^  -+-  CjXXA-, 

m. 

Ll.  + \uL 

*b-" 

Z°S. 

4-^r 

v v_. 

M,  A.CL-  cl,  A/i 
1 ' 20 

AA-loyvvu-- 

m' 

4£i 

aov.4-® 

4->c4 

\ v<_ 

^A--' 

( 

a»».  ii 

'ituX- 

fKu/w\_ . 60. 

ao«j. 

i4- 

/(cutl. 

2,10.  ^ 

$L 

dx/m. 

A ( AiA~--(^ul, 

^Xa/v\>w^- 

Xrtu  Axa— 
i 

(X/wu(xA,_  ImA— 

i 

• . t/v''' 

Aaauaau. 

#1 

AyaA_ 

4# 

/ 

(JM/L- 

$ 

AxAr 

$*=fc 

A>u|/ 

A 

v^ 

Aju 

Ill 


^ JeeT  hsi,,^. 


4 ^ : a.  . 


Hi,:  SL y «£. 


St  w-, 

eXc 


lit-:  1 

/ 


131 


v^ 

f'VVOAA. 

Lm^- 

/MO' 

yftC-  ( /f-u|A-) 

-1 : 11. 

/ftA— 

^ » 

/UL- 

JL  + Xl 

J&W- 

aXWi^ 

AAA. 

U V“ 

/Vvu )u-  A&A Aax^. 

t 1 

tr  w-.i 

f Vu<a(cL]; 

A^A^^n) 

iL  ^ u^L]  ( uX 

4&r 

^r~ 

fi- 

*? 

! £Aa/vvl-  £Avvi 

i 

IH  - 1. 


131 


i^L  (U  rnAvmta/u  A QJunx)^  ( 

Ao^s.  76  aaJltj. 


Axl 


133 


135 


an. 

CLA»  (X/LAA^-» 

m. 

►w 

IncimAuA-. 

fc^IT 

v/ 

Ajvw^ 

v iL  V^T 

*/ 

“■ 

(j/vnu- 

AA/WU- 

1TC 

tfs*F 

m fc|| 

JtoL_ 

2-77.  jB— 1 

yPP~| 

„ x \ 
flA-  , f'W'-tX-. 

V — --T 

PrTH 

C|^X/VL- 

2-71.  ^SST 

O/Vtucj 

2-80.  ^~ff^ 

an.  JpS?[ 

S^T 

IKK 

m. 

V 

/Wtct  + cp. 

•281 

N.  / 

/vwa.  *v  tt/mvH, 

* 

4cciX(X/m^( 

asf.  j^l 

4caL/  /{cfti^ 

2-86.  yjfe^p^ 

^n 

mJ^ 

fert 

IV  V 


'll:  li. 


)3i 


/UL_ 

£ 

A.aX- 

-k 

A xu 

CjJyvu 

/4ulu 

| fem 

iL 

AolL  + muL- 

(Yu  vn^ 

BS 

da/vrt — 

tfc 

cLu/wau 

1 

/Ylu/wv-  ^ 

A.  ' ' 

[<j  :51. 


m 7- 

>- 

/Wta- 

fW\Ju  ( Tuir 

■* 

m 7- 

*- 

lmA_ 

3». 

^CAA/Vl- 

'3°3. 

fc^r 

(aM/Wvll- 

t 

soi 

PfY 

^A'vvi-a.'TAyvuou- 

SoS'.  ^ 

Try 

C|/aA_  tfYouy 

3<*. 

T 

3<>i.  7HI: 

3S  3^,3^) 

^0&a 

AJl_ 

Sol  Jb^ 

tffc. 

iStK= 

UA_ 

3ii.  jcq- 

AAA- 

/ 

jg/iA/vu- 

311. 

515  TEA 

fi3T 

/{lr 

%)i-\  a® 

nrvuA_  Am.ro.  ss 

i 

315.  y 

y~ 

IL  laJL 

1 

3lfc.  \^> 

rs 

XoX-  + /wiL 

3H.  H§3 

A6_aA— 

137 


11 : - 


4=  12,. 


XIV. 


SYSTEM  OF  TRANSCRIPTION  OF  CUNEIFORM  SIGNS. 


A 


CL 


\ 

Qs 


CX-  - cu 

ad- 

air 

dir 

act- 

n 

/ 

aX  (?) 

aX 

aivm- 

CWvu- 

/ 

CX/vw- 


^st 


^=T 


CWrux- 


(Hi 


a/WUXA_ 


(Vvu 

flX/yu 

OA- 

OAXUM- 


V'' 

owl 
/ w 

OA 


(Xgoujj/ 


Am 


B. 

irou 

ircX'd—  ^ 

XXL 

XaX 


IrOAAUA 
IraA-  £j— 

ira/L 

X_ 

Xu 
Xd 
XX 
XX 

u. 


U4. 

^> 

teW 

MW 


NW 


4*- 

iA- 

D. 


dcu 

cT^oX  rhSf7 

« 

daX 


da/wu 


tfcl 


ota/u  M 


dw_  id 
Xu  ^Tf 


oUT 


du^- 

cUL 

cAaa, — 
cUL 
ciu/tr 

dJ rU 


£T 


cLmx)/ 


du(c 

(Ut  ' ^ 


-'Wnxu- 


cLu/n 


& 


I. 


/ 

Jt- 


\ 


IT 


4 


J^t/Wi/U- 

jiAaa^- 

zL 

i/H- 


iN31 


H/n-cuVL-  ^ — -~-f 


£/VW>|M/U- 


JIA 


_£Aa/w- 

Myd/ 


V/ 

J2A 


4<  ^ 

H3T" 

G. 


CL/Q — 

f 

\ 

air 

od/ 


<Vo it 

I 

^Q_Xax — 

l 

0^0</vyv 

cytwu 

cya/w- 

T 


CUVMXWU. 


Avou 

V' 

hyx-  (?) 

AudL 

AvoA- 

Au- 

JaL 

u 

\\KKs 

9 / 
/M/ 


kX 


4" 


*iuuy/ 

AAL 

^UVVVu 

»X 

iwX 


/u 


/ 


Ur 

aU" 


aep 


x 

rx  ? 

X w 

icoyk  x>"  ' 

Ly  ife? 

4ccxX^  / 

ro^u 

AcaXojy  {t^f  j 

luxio^ 

X 

/VjXjyv^- 

hmv 

•W-  ^ 

/lAvu- 

/fox/i — 

h/K-  i^f}^ 

Ac^u- 

cWnA/mva- 

AA- 

k*JC 

(frf  T ( < 

w 

UdAr 

Kif  ijipr 

ki\jvv^i.  44S[ 

Aou 

aAu  gf 

/tout  #1 

i aX  4~ 

MaL  Jlf 

Y 

ix  „ 

/tcvvvu- 

AcCl^ 

U^{Y)  xf 

/Icum- 

Aoa^(?) 

xt-  n 


/Aou/u-  ^ 
ArX/L-  yXf 
/tcwu- 

/icuA_  Ml 


L 


r 


A 'CU 

IaL 

1/CUj/ 

Axci/Cilr  n 


LX-  f~ 


m 

IX 


r 


i 


/YYVOu 


/ 

/YWOU 


\ 

f Wvc )u 


U. 

L,-+  Au 
& 

IaJi 

Aaa^ 

Xu.Au 

XuA/ 

Iwwv-  4B= 

M. 


-6 


/yvucu 
(YvCks 

fYvudy  h: 

Aua/u  9f- 


(YY\A\As  X 


/ V/ 

fYWiVV. 


'WUU- 


/ 

"VVTJl/ 


'YVlAA— 


/vrut- 


/ 

'YVUV 


\ 

'YWAA^ 


T- 


XX 
XX 


:T 


O'YOA- 

O'VUMy 

/yvuJL 

'Ywuav- 

/Ywwu 


'Wua^ 


'YyiWu- 


\/ 

OdoaaA^ 


V/ 


'WiuAs^u  Hit 


N. 


YUL- 


V 


ovajr 

'Vux^i-) 

'VUX^/ 

'Tutyui- 


^4-< 


'VUWvu. 

Oau^u|A- 

JWuvv^ 

/V\JL_ 

•Yua_ 


>5® 


'Yw 


/ 

'YU- 


'Vu(c|') 

Yo<|aav- 
. / 

mju^vvu- 
. \ 

(Yu,q^/v^ 
'Yu /vw- 

'Yu/w- 


ttT 

^><T 


/ 

'Yu/w- 


/VUA^' 


t 


(YUa/Wv- 


/ 

rY\M/wi ' 


/YUvvu 


T. 


^vcu  ^ 

^+ai 
/|vCuL 
I |va(ot) 

|uxjv  >>< 

-|wi|v'4  Jt- 

lu.  -<^— 

/|uaa_ 


1. 


rvuAcu 

<Hw_  ^ &.  I A*”’-  M 


aacL  HT* 


/ 

Ju- 


145 


hx u 


KMs 


Jiau 


s. 


/iou 


Ax- 


Aoy 
A^x^/ 

/UtkftAi-  ^T^tX 
AxX, 


+ TOX 


AoX 


+ rms_ 


#F- 


A&^Vvt^ 

A-a/u. 


AaA~ 


Axy 

Ax^/ 


Aw  >=* 

Aiy(-j 

AJupu 

Ai-X  w 

aA  je^t 

/iu^vw)  ^ 


<w 


AjU- 

a6u 

AjtAvm- 

Axu 

Au^ 


AxXr 

My  J5T 


AmJas 

k/ 

Am)ama~ 

AmX. 

/Ux(vvu)  ^ 

Am- 


s 


Ax 


Atx 


V/ 

s. 


Axu 

<x_ 

j^Jyy 


Axy  Xf-^f 

Aa(y) 

Ax^ly) 

/uuyoM-  "44^^ 
XcOy 

V" 

A<Vm/ 


V' 

A-^^X- 

V' 

At- 

AM 

V v" 

AutA. 

AxM 

v' 

A A/wu 
A wv 

s/ 

Aaa^ 

v 

Axx 

^ / 
M/ 


iPi 


AiUr  ^jf 

Axir 

Au(y)  M 
Ax+y 

lx 

JltiXs 

v 

Ax^vw 
Aaxvo^X 
A^vu^vv.  ^-i-T 


Xx- 

XoXr 


T. 


<\y 

Xoa_  ^ 

tt 

^4A- 

A 
Aft 

ftiX-  i> — ■<, 


— A 


146 


Ay- 


Awvu 
Aa. 

A(4)  £^>4. 

Ay)  ^r 
Ay) 


u. 


u. 


/ 

U- 

\ 

U- 


u. 


AA_ 

A 

AA- 

aaIt 

u4_ 


u(cL) 

4 

\ 

A wy 

Mz 

il  + C|UA_ 

\k\\Ms 

\S 

UtIguA 

AaJL 

Aa/vvu 

'tT' 

/U/vw  + 'Taj 

- H 

'y 

i.*"- 

4am_ 

fcW 

U/Vbu{y) 

m 

AA/VLu^y) 

4A/vut[y) 

<^y) 

lA/vu^y) 

4W 

4A_ 

/ 

UA- 

\ 

/UA_ 

UA- 

K[Mt 

UA_ 

^SEf 

A 

UA- 

U 

UA/ 

UAAA- 

pt 

\ 

UAm- 

UAXu 

a) 

AaAA/L- 

UAuJtu- 

srr 

UAOA. 

UA. 

AAAj 

>j^S- 

Y. 

r 

TF(4 

z. 

^cu 

Tf 

5oy 

iP' 

3^ 

3-5-  % 
^Jr  ^ 

3My) 

3*3 

3A*-  ^ 


CUNEIFORM 

TENTS 


PL  1 


2 


Pl.  2 


1 m 


PL  3 


11 


PI.  5 


Tablet. 


Case. 


PL  6 


13 

Case. 


PL  7 


PL  8 


o 


PI  9 


10 


PL  10 


20 


o. 


5 


f % 

Mf 

pFT^ 

IFl 

21 


22 

Tablet. 


PL  11 


PL  12 
25 


PL  U 


31 


32 


35 


36 


Pl.  15 


38 


Continued 


Pl.  17 


46 


PI  18 


PI.  19 


Pl.  20 


52 


Continued 


R. 


R. 


R. 


55 


54 


0. 


o. 


R. 


5 


Col- 1.  Col.  II.  Col.  IV.  Col.  III. 


Pl.  21 


o 

vf- 


^3- 


SB 


C) 

>«•< 


*0 


59 


61 


PL  23 


60 


°- 


PL  2U 


R. 


a 


Wit 


PI  25 


PL  26 


PI  27 


© 


Pl.  29 


77 


Pl.  30 


78 


Erasure. 


PI.  31 


o 


PI.  32 


80 


82 


15 


PL  33 


co 

oo 


xa 


Col.  I.  Col.  II.  Col.  IV.  Col.  III. 


PI.  3 A 


*<5 


Q> 


© 


85 


PL  35 


Horizontal  wedge  mistake  of  scribe. 


PL  36 


L.  E. 


89 


20 


PL  37 


© 


PL  38 


o 


PL  39 


92 


0. 


15 


R. 


20 


io 

■ ■ 


^wMumi 


25 


93 


PL  AO 


PL  41 


l-O 

Oi 


o 


Pl.  43 


99 


PL  44 


' 


PL  45 


WO 


Continued 

Col.  IV.  Col.  III. 


L.  E. 


PI  46 


© 

o 


© 

o 


© 

o 


PI  J,7 


104 


PL  48 


107 


PI  A9 


o—o  Erasure, 


10 


Col.  X.  Col.  IX.  Col.  VIII.  Col.  VII. 


Pl.  50 


Ill 


PL  51 


m 


PL  52 


Continued 


0. 


5 


10 


116 

y-  W IT 


Pl.  53 


5 


121 


PL  56 


PL  57 


L.  E. 


Wl- 


< 


) 


127 


Pl.  58 


15 


129 


130 


PI  59 


PL  60 


132 


PL  61 


Continued 


PL  62 


<0 

CO 


Ki 

*3 


o 


5 

10 

15 

20 

5 


136 


137 


PL  63 


HO 


142 


PL  6 A 


144 


145 


PI.  65 


JL. 


5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 


148 


149 


PL  66 


Pl.  67 


PL  68 
158 


165 


168 


Pl.  70 


PL.  I 


1.  OBVERSE 


2.  REVERSE 


3.  OBVERSE 


4 REVERSE 


1,  2,  COURT  PROCEEDINGS  IN  REGARD  TO  A SLAVE. 

3,  4.  COURT  PROCEEDINGS  IN  REGARD  TO  AN  OFFICE. 


PL.  II 


7 OBVERSE  8.  REVERSE 


5,  6.  A BOND  IN  REGARD  TO  THE  PAYMENT  OF  CORN. 
7,  8.  A PROMISSORY  NOTE  IN  REGARD  TO  SILVER. 


PL.  Ill 


9 OBVERSE  lO.  REVERSE 


9-14.  CASE  OR  ENVELOPE  OF  PRECEDING  TABLET  (PL.  II.  7.  8). 


PL.  IV 


15,  16.  PURCHASE  OF  A PALM  GROVE. 


17  OBVERSE 


18  REVERSE 


19.  OBVERSE 


21.  OBVERSE 


20.  REVERSE 


22.  REVERSE 


17,  18o  ACKNOWLEDGMENT  OF  A LOAN  OF  CORN. 

19,  20.  RECEIPT  FOR  SILVER. 

21,  22.  CASE  OR  ENVELOPE,  IN  WH I CH  ORIGINALLY  HAD  BEEN  ENCLOSED  A RECEIPT  FOR  CORN. 


PL.  VI 


23,24.  ACCOUNT  OF  DATE  HARVEST. 


PL.  VII 


25,26.  INVENTORY  LIST. 


PL.  VIII 


28  REVERSE 


2 7 . 


OBVERSE 


27,28.  A “ ROUND-UP”  OF  CATTLE 


PL.  IX 


29.  OBVERSE 


30  REVERSE 


31.  OBVERSE 


32.  REVERSE 


29,  30.  ESTIMATE  OF  COST  FOR  TILLING  A CERTAIN  NUMBER  OF  FIELDS. 
31,  32.  ACCOUNT  OF  CORN,  GIVING  VALUE  IN  SILVER  AND  LEAD. 


33.  OBVERSE  34-  reverse 


PL.  X 


33,  34.  LIST  OF  OFFICIALS  AND  EMPLOYES. 


••  c 


PL.  XI 


35.  OBVERSE 


36.  REVERSE 


35,  36.  SUMMARY  ACCOUNT  OF  CORN  AND  WHEAT, 
37.  FRAGMENT  OF  A PAY  LIST. 


REVERSE 


PL.  XII 


I 


THE  BABYLONIAN  EXPEDITION 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  PENNSYLVANIA 

EDITED  BY 

R.  V.  RUprecbt. 

The  following  volumes  have  been  published  or  are  in  press  : 

Series  H,  Cuneiform  Ccxts : 

Vol.  Is  Old  Babylonian  Inscriptions,  chiefly  from  Nippur,  by  H.  Y.  Hilprecht. 

Part  1,  1893,  $5.00  (out  of' print). 

Part  2,  1896,  $5.00. 

Vol.  Ill:  Sumerian  Administrative  Documents  from  the  Time  of  the  Second  Dynasty  of  Ur. 

Part  1,  from  the  Nippur  Collections  in  Philadelphia,  by  David  W.  Mykrman,  1910,  $6.00. 

Part  2,  from  the  Nippur  Collections  in  Constantinople,  by  P.  Engelbert  Huber  (ready  for  press). 

Vol.  VI:  Babylonian  Legal  and  Business  Documents  from  the  Time  of  the  First  Dynasty  of  Babylon. 

Part  1,  chiefly  from  Sippar,  by  H.  Ranke,  1906,  $6.00. 

Part  2,  chiefly  from  Nippur , by  Arno  Poebel,  1909,  $6.00. 

Vol.  VIII:  Legal  and  Commercial  Transactions,  dated  in  the  Assyrian,  Neo-Babylonian  and  Persian  Periods. 

Part  1,  chiefly  from  Nippur,  by  A.  T.  Clay,  1908,  $6.00. 

Vol.  IX:  Business  Documents  of  MurashA  Sons  of  Nippur,  dated  in  the  Reign  of  Artaxerxes  I,  by  H V.  Hilprecht 
and  A.  T.  Clay,  1898,  $6.00. 

Vol.  X:  Business  Documents  of  MurashA  Sons  of  Nippur,  dated  in  the  Reign  of  Darius  II,  by  A.  T.  Clay, 

1904.  $6.00. 

Vol.  XIV:  Documents  from  the  Temple  Archives  of  Nippur,  dated  in  the  Reigns  of  Cassite  Rulers,  with  complete 
dates,  by  A.  T Clay,  1906,  $6.00. 

Vol.  XV:  Documents  from  the  Temple  Archives  of  Nippur,  dated  in  the  Reigns  of  Cassite  Rulers,  with  incom- 
plete dates,  by  A.  T.  Clay,  1906,  $6.00. 

Vol.  XVII:  Letters  to  Cassite  Kings  from  the  Temple  Archives  of  Nippur. 

Part  1,  by  Hugo  Radau,  1908,  $6.00. 

Vol.  XIX:  Model  Texts  and  Exercises  from  the  Temple  School  of  Nippur. 

Part  1,  by  H.  V.  Hilprecht  (in  press). 

Vol.  XX:  Mathematical,  Metrological  and  Chronological  Texts  from  the  Temple  Library  of  Nippur. 

Part  1,  by  H.  V.  Hilprecht,  1906,  $5.00. 

Vol.  XXVIII:  Sumerian  Hymns  and  Prayers  to  Enlil  from  the  Temple  Library  of  Nippur. 

Part  1,  by  Hugo  Radau  (in  press). 

Vol.  XXIX:  Sumerian  Hymns  and  Prayers  to  NIN=IB  from  the  Temple  Library  of  Nippur. 

Part  1,  by  Hugo  Radau  (in  press). 

Vol.  XXX:  Sumerian  Hymns  and  Prayers  to  TamAz  from  the  Temple  Library  of  Nippur. 

Part  1,  by  Hugo  Radau  (in  press). 

Berks  D,  Researches  and  Creatises : 

Vol.  Is  The  Excavations  in  Assyria  and  Babylonia  (with  120  illustrations  and  2 maps),  by  H.  V.  Hilprecht,  7th 
editioh,  1904,  $2.50. 

Note:  Entirely  revised  German  and  French  editions  are  in  the  course  of  preparation.  The  first  part  of  the 
German  edition  (bis  sum  Auftreten  Be  Sarzecs)  appeared  in  December,  1904  (J.  C.  Hinrichs,  Leipzig: 
A.  J.  Holman  & Co.,  Philadelphia,  Pa.,  sole  agents  for  America).  Price  4 Mark  in  paper  covers,  5 
Mark  in  cloth. 

Vol.  Ill:  Early  Babylonian  Personal  Names  from  the  published  Tablets  of  the  so-called  Hammurabi  Dynasty,  by 

H.  Ranke,  1905,  $2.00. 

Vol.  IV:  A New  Boundary  Stone  of  Nebuchadrezzar  1 from  Nippur  (with  16  halftone  illustrations  and  36  drawings), 
by  William  J.  Hinke,  1907,  $3.50. 

Vol.  V:  Fragments  of  Epical  Literature  from  the  Temple  Library  of  Nippur. 

Fasciculus  t,  The  Oldest  Version  of  the  Babylonian  Deluge  Story  and  the  Temple  Library  of  Nippur,  by 
H.  V.  Hilprecht,  $0.75. 

Fasciculus  2,  NIN-IB,  the  Determiner  of  Fates,  according  to  the  great  Sumerian  Epic,  “ Lugale  ug  melambi 
nergal,”  by  Hugo  Radau  (in  press). 

(other  volumes  will  be  announced  latek.) 

All  orders  for  these  books  to  be  addressed  to 

THE  MUSEUM  OF  ARCHAEOLOGY, 

University  of  Pennsylvania, 

SOLE  AGENT  FOR  EUROPE  : PHILADELPHIA,  PA. 

Rudolf  Merkel,  Erlangen,  Germany. 


. 


/ 


